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: certain unalienable Rights [View all]Atypical Liberal
(5,412 posts)58. It doesn't matter.
having the most powerful federal force in the history of the world makes the second amendment pointless. The federal army is too powerful for citizens to stand against it and has no need for civilians to help defend the country from invaders. Its either a large military or an armed citizenry having both is pointless
It doesn't matter.
It doesn't matter if the citizens of the United States can or would even attempt to serve as military forces in an emergency.
Our Constitution provides for it, and it is the law of the land that they can own the weapons that allow them the option to do so if they wish to try.
It doesn't matter.
It doesn't matter if the citizens of the United States can or would even attempt to serve as military forces in an emergency.
Our Constitution provides for it, and it is the law of the land that they can own the weapons that allow them the option to do so if they wish to try.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
72 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
If it was a handful of yahoos trying to take over a governmet building, you'd be right
sylvi
Oct 2012
#41
one more major terrorist attack and americans couldn't hand over their rights
michael811
Oct 2012
#51
the military your neighbors your friends and it will all be in the name of patriotism
michael811
Oct 2012
#54
If we are going all originalist here we can have no permanent army, the wish to have every man armed
Vincardog
Sep 2012
#2
There you have it "occasional need for the existence of an armed contingent" OCCASIONAL not
Vincardog
Sep 2012
#11
Where is the Constitutional restriction against having the Corporations own the politicians? They
Vincardog
Sep 2012
#10
Why would the constitution grant the right to raise an army to the government?
4th law of robotics
Sep 2012
#34