Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Gun Control & RKBA
In reply to the discussion: Who are the Militia? [View all]beevul
(12,194 posts)53. No, it really doesn't.
Amendment 2 does not "call for" anything.
Any absurd notions or assertions to the contrary prove without a shadow of a doubt, ignorance of the bill of rights, its purpose, and how it functions.
The constitution separate from the bill of rights is a different matter. We however, are discussing an amendment in the bill of rights - which has the soul purpose of restricting the exercise of power by government.
If you read through the amendments, carefully, you may detect a trend which illustrates that for you.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
174 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Of course I do, its right there in the Constitution, the Militia Acts, even the Federalist papers.
jmg257
Jul 2013
#45
It might. But then agan...why would a sand bag brigade need arms? Or to be well regulated? nt
jmg257
Jul 2013
#72
YOU get to define the term "well-regulated"? In spite its use in several other period
jmg257
Jul 2013
#56
Yes! You are of course right. Which is why I dont get all the yap about "militia".
jmg257
Jul 2013
#89
Ha! Ha! You are still on regulated = equipped? Bullshit yesterday, bullshit today,
jmg257
Jul 2013
#125
You might want to read this too, on the importance of preambles in amendments...
jmg257
Jul 2013
#61
Are you stating that there was such a thing as "the unorganized milita" in 1791?
jmg257
Jul 2013
#63
No, its my turn to say again...the militia referred to in 1792 were REGULATED, organized,
jmg257
Jul 2013
#98
True - and mention the creation of the National Guard as the new "well-regulated militia".
jmg257
Jul 2013
#50
re: "...75% americans did not have any federal right to bear arms in late 1700's."
discntnt_irny_srcsm
Jul 2013
#86
Modern usage of term "militia" = anti-government, anti-tax extremists and fruitcakes
Jessy169
Jul 2013
#31
Actually, he's looking at the governments military organization definition. :) n/t
Decoy of Fenris
Jul 2013
#54
Yeah, but I'm having fun too, and his inability to answer is much of the fun n/t
hansberrym
Jul 2013
#154
Perhaps curiosity will get the best of you, and you will read the thread -or maybe not. n/t
hansberrym
Jul 2013
#140
You just caught that? Which makes his whole "unlimited power of the sword" thingie pretty silly,
jmg257
Jul 2013
#81
There you go. So in order to prevent the abuse of the power actually granted
hansberrym
Jul 2013
#142