Finally, intelligent gun regulations

It was regulated as are most things in a civil society.

It means the militia was in an effective shape to fight." In other words, it didn't mean the state was controlling the militia in a certain way, but rather that the militia was prepared to do its duty.


Did u not get that?
 
It means the militia was in an effective shape to fight." In other words, it didn't mean the state was controlling the militia in a certain way, but rather that the militia was prepared to do its duty.


Did u not get that?
I also know that all rights are regulated. There is a limits to your rights. Kick and scream all you want, but, you only have those rights society allows you to have.
 
My house and a neighbors were shot at by a disgruntled boyfriend of the girl next door. I had just left the Diamond Mall shopping center when a guy rolled through with a gun?

Do those count?

Too bad Democrats don't advocate for better mental healthcare in schools and medical plans like they do for banning guns.
 
It was regulated as are most things in a civil society.

What did it mean to be well regulated?

One of the biggest challenges in interpreting a centuries-old document is that the meanings
of words change or diverge.

"Well-regulated in the 18th century tended to be something like well-organized, well-armed,
well-disciplined," says Rakove. "It didn't mean 'regulation' in the sense that we use it now, in
that it's not about the regulatory state. There's been nuance there. It means the militia was
in an effective shape to fight."

In other words, it didn't mean the state was controlling the militia in a certain way, but rather
that the militia was prepared to do its duty.


https://constitutioncenter.org/images/uploads/news/CNN_Aug_11.pdf
 
I also know that all rights are regulated. There is a limits to your rights. Kick and scream all you want, but, you only have those rights society allows you to have.

You're using previous regulations to justify piling on more regulations. That argument is exactly what flipped the NRA from a gun owners club to a political organization in the 1990s.

It's why gun owners like myself will not give one inch to Democrats on gun regs because, if you give a Democrat an inch, they'll want it all...and eventually take whatever they like.
 
I also know that all rights are regulated. There is a limits to your rights. Kick and scream all you want, but, you only have those rights society allows you to have.

Than blacks should stfu about Jim Crow days etc...those were the rights society allowed them at the time!
 
It means the militia was in an effective shape to fight." In other words, it didn't mean the state was controlling the militia in a certain way, but rather that the militia was prepared to do its duty.


Did u not get that?

The current EU is similar in many ways to the US prior to the Civil War. For one thing, each state wanted to protect their own autonomy which included their right to raise a militia, the alternative to a standing army. Cheaper too. Besides, people fight better when they are protecting their homes than being drafted to fight someone else's war.

As this Congress.gov Second Amendment link notes, the concern was an overreaching Federal government thus "that the federal government should not have any authority at all to disarm the citizenry."

The two separate issues covered in the Second Amendment was this right of States to raise a militia and also, what real liberals considered common sense, that all citizens had a right to firearms.
 
no....Trump wouldn't have fucked with domestic oil production.....

Domestic oil production fell because people were doing less traveling during the pandemic. It has already started to increase as travel has picked up again. That reduction began during Trump's term. He, like Biden, did not mess with production. It dropped because demand fell.
 
It is? Where? And even if it did, where does it say that right can't be regulated?

You are interpreting the Second Amendment the way you want it to read

Awesome. You can't be bothered by reading links and accuse me of doing what you're doing. How Trumpian of you. Another reason why I can't hold my nose long enough to vote for Democrats.
 
The REALITY is that if not for the media, Biden wouldn't be President. I know you want to pretend that it's just because everyone hated Trump. But that's a dumb lie.

The funniest argument about the Biden miracle is the one that ignores how Biden wasn't liked much at all and without much of a campaign, got millions more votes than the much more popular Obama. In fact, we had a turnout that far exceeded any previous election. Yet Trump was the one filling venues with enthusiastic crowds and campaigned. Biden couldn't fill a school auditorium.

Mail in voting, which is subject to massive fraud, jurists overturning State elections laws, media lies about Trump and Covid and billionaires funding Democrats are what got Biden elected.
[/QUOTE/]

Nobody wins the presidency by filling up auditoriums. The candidate with the most enthusiastic supporters usually has less of them. Most Americans are middle-of-the road and do not attend rallies. His supporters have to actually vote.

You will never understand the 2020 election as long as you blame the media, mail-in ballots, fraud....

These are claims Trump made based on what he heard from somebody else. All those lies have been proven wrong.

Biden won because there are more Democrats than Republicans and most Americans do not like Trump.
 
You're paying a business to provide it just like a buyer paying for a gun. The Cyber-Crime fees and Internet access tax are to cover liability for child porn, cyberbullying, monitoring domestic terrorists, etc.
There is no such tax. There is no 'liability' for child porn. It is simply just a crime. Those pushing it can be criminally charged. Define 'cyberbullying'. You don't even know what 'terrorist' means.
Agreed it could be handled in other ways...just like guns. Guns are tools like computers but that's not what I'm talking about.
It is what you are talking about, though you don't believe in such a statement.
I'm talking about you supporting charging Americans for their rights. IMO, it's a very, very bad precedent. Some here have said that precedent is set so it's okay to go even further. I disagree.

Why are you bothering? YOU support those that would take away guns, trample on your rights, HAVE overthrown the government, use buzzwords like you do, throw insults like you do, hate America like you do, and discard the Constitution of the United States and all State constitutions, like you do.

You support The Oligarchy. You support the Democrats.
 
NY successfully destroyed the NRA by making these insurance policies illegal.

The problem with the insurance policies is that they insure illegal activities. Not sure how these policies will be written, or who will be selling them

The NRA is not destroyed.
Owning a firearm is not illegal. Carrying a firearm is not illegal. Self defense is not illegal.
 
Last edited:
It means the militia was in an effective shape to fight." In other words, it didn't mean the state was controlling the militia in a certain way, but rather that the militia was prepared to do its duty.


Did u not get that?

States control militias. They create them. They train them. They disband them.
 
Awesome. Can't wait until we bring back poll taxes and monetize other rights. Goooooooo Democrats! LOL

Personally, I favor requiring all citizens to have to pass a citizenship exam prior to voting. Annually. California is setting a precedent here.

Outstanding Dutch!
 
Back
Top