Correct. In other words. In good working condition.
1 Like
Yes it is. If nobody is pushing for it. It’s an imaginary issue.
Arms isn’t defined. So, as soon as you start saying what arms are and aren’t covered by the 2nd you are establishing that the 2nd contains an inherent argument for some kind of regulation.
3 Likes
Well for one thing Nobody sells bazookas. Anywhere. I think they’ve been obsolete since the 1950’s. But I could be wrong.
1 Like
How are the Aussies, Kiwis, Belgians, Germans and Japanese doing? Are people beaten down and oppressed? Seems to me these guys show up pretty favorably regarding human freedoms: https://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/2021-03/human-freedom-index-2020.pdf
How about the Nigerians and the Hondurans, which have widely permissive gun laws? How they doin?
Picking out 5 of the ~190 countries that have stricter gun control than us and saying “See!” is a logical fallacy called hasty generalization.
And why is it always Venezuela with you people? You people are digital - there’s “Conservative,” and there is “Venezuela”, with nothing in between.
1 Like
is anthrax considered arms?
Is somebody complaining that the feds want to seize their anthrax? Chemical weapons have been banned through the Geneva convention. And nobody is complaining.
.
.
Your rambling does not change the truth which I posted above.
Additionally, in addition to Venezuela, I believe I also listed communist China, socialist Cuba, North Korea,. Did I not?
JWK
“Guns? What for?..to fight the government? The Cuban people don’t need guns nowadays!” (Fidel Castro during his very first speech upon entering Havana Jan. 8, 1959.)
Is a well regulated militia necessary?
When the 2A was written it clearly was necessary but I don’t believe we had a standing army at the time. One could argue the 2A isn’t as important as it was was.
Well c’mon…5 minutes with one of these babies would make up for all last year😈
thats easy…
Well Regulated: Working well, or operating as it should.
arms: the equipment of offence or defence used by the common foot soldier.
what politicians want it to mean at this time is irrelevant unless an amendment is passed.
3 Likes
Let me break the news to you. We, the People, have already decided when ratifying our first ten amendments.
I suggest you read the Second Amendment very, very slowly. While it notes a militia is necessary to the security of a free State, the only guarantee mentioned in the Second Amendment is “. . . the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” This is an established right which preceded the birth of our existing Constitution, and the Second Amendment was specifically adopted as a prohibition against our federal government, which is prohibited in the enactment of federal legislation meddling with the people’s right to keep and bear arms.
The simple truth is, after creating our federal Constitution which became effective in 1789, ten amendments were quickly adopted [1791] which were intentionally designed “to prevent misconstruction or abuse of “ the new government’s “powers“ , and is so stated in the Resolution of the First Congress Submitting Twelve Amendments to the Constitution; March 4, 1789
THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added .
Among those restrictive clauses is the Second Amendment prohibiting federal legislation infringing upon the people’s right to keep and bear arms.
JWK
In every oppressive country like communist China, socialist Cuba, North Korea, Venezuela, etc., the people are disarmed and suffer the loss of inalienable rights under an iron fisted government which lives large on the people’s labor. Forewarned is forearmed.
2 Likes
You have my respect and ear sir.
Ring-a-ding ding!
Folks we have a winnah!
The Jan 6th mind warp put a scare in the elitists. They know an organized “well armed militia” could indeed overthrow a tyrannical government.
You seem to have forgotten about the tanks, aircraft, trained and armed troops …etc etc…that the government has… None of which made an appearance Jan 6th…lol.
If you think that it’s rambling to point out the obvious fallacy in your argument, I don’t know what to tell you.
Here’s your argument:
The manager of the Yankees says, “I don’t want any Dominicans on my team. The Pirates, Mariners, and Tigers all have Dominicans, and they are terrible teams.” (Yeah, but so do 20 other teams, including last year’s series winner…)
Here’s the same argument, put differently.
Look at Singapore, Japan, and Australia: hugely restrictive gun laws. Nearly zero homicides!
Have a super weekend.
Don’t ruin fantasies with reality.
I’m glad that on Jan 6, no one was crazy to bring arms to overthrow. While I don’t agree with the violence, it could have been much worse.
You are very ambitious and presumptuous in your unsubstantiated assertion.
JWK
There is no better way to weaken, subdue and bring to its knees a prosperous and freedom loving country than by flooding it with the poverty stricken, poorly educated, low skilled, diseased, disabled and criminal populations of other countries.
False. Courts decide. Not internet message board constitutional experts.
1 Like
