Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the Online Debate Network.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 104

Thread: 2nd Amendment

  1. #1
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    234
    Post Thanks / Like

    2nd Amendment

    The Supreme Court at first decided not to decide to hear a case involving the 2nd Amendment. They put off their vote. However, sooner than expected, they have now decided to hear the case. It involves the total gun ban in Washington, D.C.

    It is possible that the Court could reach some kind of decision that does not have the effect of incorporating the right to bear arms under the 14th Amendment, and thus actually decide nothing about the larger issues. Perhaps they will decide that the words about a "well regulated Militia" were not just fluff but actually had meaning. Perhaps not.
    From The Treaty of Tripoli, Art. 11, negociated under Washington, passed unanimously by the senate, and signed by Adams -- "As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion;"

  2. #2
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Sheffield, S.Yorks., UK
    Posts
    8,862
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 2nd Amendment

    Regulated (peoples') Militia = National Guard, or in the case of the UK = Territorial Army (The Territorials).
    "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." - Anais Nin.
    Emitte lucem et veritatem - Send out light and truth.
    'Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt' - Julius Caesar (rough translation, 'Men will think what they want to think')
    Kill my boss? Do I dare live out the American dream? - Homer Simpson.

  3. #3
    Will ADMIN 4 Gas Money

    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Rochester, NY, USA
    Posts
    1,501
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 2nd Amendment

    Honestly, I don't see how the court can't find that law unconstitutional. A complete ban on fire arms is clearly a violation of the second amendment.

    Also, the fact that DC is ranked 7th in murder (and high in violent crimes in general) in the United States speaks to the fact that the gun ban doesn't discourage crime.

    Stats here: United States cities by crime rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    -= Phrique =-

    I've got mad hits like I was Rod Carew.
    - The Beastie Boys

  4. #4
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    9,657
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 2nd Amendment

    Quote Originally Posted by FruitandNut View Post
    Regulated (peoples') Militia = National Guard, or in the case of the UK = Territorial Army (The Territorials).
    Wrong. Militia = US citizens.

    U.S. Code as of: 01/19/04
    Section 311. Militia: composition and classes

    (a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied
    males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section
    313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a
    declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States
    and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the
    National Guard.
    (b) The classes of the militia are -
    (1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard
    and the Naval Militia; and
    (2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of
    the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the
    Naval Militia.

    http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/script...tle=10&sec=311

  5. #5
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Sheffield, S.Yorks., UK
    Posts
    8,862
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 2nd Amendment

    unorganised/regulated militia = mob anarchy.
    "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." - Anais Nin.
    Emitte lucem et veritatem - Send out light and truth.
    'Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt' - Julius Caesar (rough translation, 'Men will think what they want to think')
    Kill my boss? Do I dare live out the American dream? - Homer Simpson.

  6. #6
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    9,657
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 2nd Amendment

    Quote Originally Posted by FruitandNut View Post
    unorganised/regulated militia = mob anarchy.
    You and I are unorganized militia (assuming you are a US citizen) and we aren't participating in mob anarchy.

  7. #7
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    7,671
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 2nd Amendment

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    You and I are unorganized militia (assuming you are a US citizen) and we aren't participating in mob anarchy.
    Well, I think an unorganized militia is an oxymoron .

    Gun control was never an issue of importance for me since I never had or needed a gun. If the constitution is in question, I just have to trust the Supreme Court to decide - even if they are a bunch of fuddie duddies.
    While laughing at others stupidity, you may want to contemplate your own comedic talents. (link)
    Disclaimer: This information is being provided for informational, educational, and entertainment purposes only.

  8. #8
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    9,657
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 2nd Amendment

    Quote Originally Posted by Snoop View Post
    Well, I think an unorganized militia is an oxymoron .

    Gun control was never an issue of importance for me since I never had or needed a gun. If the constitution is in question, I just have to trust the Supreme Court to decide - even if they are a bunch of fuddie duddies.
    From what I can see, the "unorganized militia" is just everyone. We aren't participating in any militia activity, but if there was a crisis where militias were needed, like if a foreign army invaded, then we would organize as citizens and be able to fight as a militia. And of course there's no guarentee that someone else will give us our weapons so for the sake of the citizenry being able to form militias, the citizens should have the right to keep their own guns.

    So because it is important for the citizenry to able to form militias to protect the state, citizens have the right to bear arms.

    And just because such a need has not arisen in our lifetimes doesn't mean that we should give up the right to be able to defend our country as citizens.

  9. #9
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    8,243
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 2nd Amendment

    Quote Originally Posted by FRUIT
    unorganised/regulated militia = mob anarchy.
    nope.. it = LIBERTY
    Quote Originally Posted by Benjamin Franklin
    Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!
    Quote Originally Posted by U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth circuit
    NRA-ILA :: Articles
    In fact, the text of the Constitution, as a whole, strongly suggests that the words ’the people' have precisely the same meaning within the Second Amendment as without. And as used throughout the Constitution, ’the people' have ’rights' and ’powers,' but federal and state governments only have ’powers' or ’authority', never ’??rights........
    We have found no historical evidence that the Second Amendment was intended to convey militia power to the states, limit the federal government's power to maintain a standing army, or applies only to members of a select militia while on active duty. All of the evidence indicates that the Second Amendment, like other parts of the Bill of Rights, applies to and protects individual Americans. We find that the history of the Second Amendment reinforces the plain meaning of its text, namely that it protects individual Americans in their right to keep and bear arms whether or not they are a member of a select militia or performing active military service or training. '"
    I read somewhere else, that the states passed legislation defining the Militia, and how it was to be run, but never said anything about arming them; neither did they provide funds to arm the "Militia". It was assumed that the population had guns.

    Quote Originally Posted by SAME LINK
    hey had just finished winning their freedoms with gun in hand, and would, in their next session, pass legislation requiring most male citizens to buy and own at least one firearm and 30 rounds of ammunition.
    Apparently at least some states actually required Citizens to own guns? .. My how the debate has changed.
    Last edited by MindTrap028; November 21st, 2007 at 03:42 PM.
    I apologize to anyone waiting on a response from me. I am experiencing a time warp, suddenly their are not enough hours in a day. As soon as I find a replacement part to my flux capacitor regulator, time should resume it's normal flow.

  10. #10
    Austin117
    Guest

    Re: 2nd Amendment

    2nd Amendment use it or lose it!

  11. #11
    Will ADMIN 4 Gas Money

    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Rochester, NY, USA
    Posts
    1,501
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 2nd Amendment

    An interesting side question...does anyone think the prevalence of guns in the United States could in any way discourage military invasion above and beyond the fact that our military is already hugely powerful when compared to others?
    -= Phrique =-

    I've got mad hits like I was Rod Carew.
    - The Beastie Boys

  12. #12
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    234
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 2nd Amendment

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    Wrong. Militia = US citizens.
    But the Constitution doesn't discuss the unorganized militia, otherwise you would have the right to have the government buy weapons for you.

    It is clear from the Constitution itself that Congress didn't mean everybody. Article I, Section 8 states that it is the duty of Congress "To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;" and "To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States,..." Further, Article II, Section 2 states that "The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States,..." The implication that the militia is merely the rabble but those who serve and are armed and trained by the government.

    The inspiration for the 2nd Amendment came from the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Virginia of 1776. In Section 13 it resolves "That a well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defence of a free State;" Historians agree that this was the prevailing definition of the Militia at the time the Constitution was written. Clearly a militia cannot be well regulated if it consists of nothing more than everyone running around with guns. The concept from Virginia (from James Madison) was that the citizens of the Militia had been trained to arms. The U.S. Constitution goes on to assert that their training, arming, and discipline is the responsibility of Congress and that the President is the C-in-C when they are called to federal duty.

    Whether the Supreme Court will see it that way or will decide that the clauses about "well regulated" and "security of a free state" are just fluff that never had any meaning will be decided. Maybe they will decide that everyone can be armed without regulation or training.

    Maybe they will decide that the rights to own firearms is still a matter that is subject to the will of the people in their state and local governments.
    From The Treaty of Tripoli, Art. 11, negociated under Washington, passed unanimously by the senate, and signed by Adams -- "As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion;"

  13. #13
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    8,243
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 2nd Amendment

    Quote Originally Posted by phrique
    An interesting side question...does anyone think the prevalence of guns in the United States could in any way discourage military invasion above and beyond the fact that our military is already hugely powerful when compared to others?
    It sure can't hurt

    Quote Originally Posted by pandion
    But the Constitution doesn't discuss the unorganized militia, otherwise you would have the right to have the government buy weapons for you.
    Yes it does. The fact is "militia" didn't refer to the national guard in any way shape or form.
    Also, it is not the gov responsibility to provide you with the ability to use a right. That is up to the person. The Gov doesn't buy pen and paper for every citizen. Nor does it give people money so they can pursue happiness.

    Quote Originally Posted by PANDION
    t is clear from the Constitution itself that Congress didn't mean everybody.
    Support?
    In fact article 1 section 8 at a glance defines two diffrent things.
    To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

    To provide and maintain a Navy;

    To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

    To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
    It says to call forth the militia? Where is this militia being called from? Hint Hint.. the people are the militia. The Gov is just calling them, and training them, and arming them while under Gov employ.

    Look at the wording.. "Calling forth The Militia". As though it exists before it is called. In fact, they are calling forth Citizens. Not to be in the militia, but because they ARE the militia.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pandion
    The implication that the militia is merely the rabble but those who serve and are armed and trained by the government.
    No, it shows that while the Militia is called it is to answer to the president.

    Also, you have to remember that unless the Constitution says you can't do it, then the right is preserved for the people. As all rights are First the Citizens, and then from the Citizens given to the Gov.
    Read the link, and what the founding fathers said.
    NRA-ILA :: Articles

    Thomas Jefferson said, "No free man shall be debarred the use of arms."

    Patrick Henry said, "The great object is, that every man be armed."

    Richard Henry Lee wrote that, "to preserve liberty it is essential that the whole body of people always possess arms."

    Thomas Paine noted, "[A]rms . . . discourage and keep the invader and the plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property."
    Quote Originally Posted by Pandion
    Historians agree that this was the prevailing definition of the Militia at the time the Constitution was written.
    Proof? Link?
    In fact is seems clear the opposite is true.
    NRA-ILA :: Articles
    The Constitution and Bill of Rights repeatedly refer to the "rights" of the people and to the "powers" of government. The Supreme Court has recognized that the phrase
    "the people," which is used in numerous parts of the Constitution, including the Preamble, the Second, Fourth, Ninth and Tenth Amendments, refers to people as individuals. In each case, rights belonging to "the people" are without question the rights of individuals.
    Just so you can see.
    Quote Originally Posted by SECOND AMENDMENT
    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
    Key words are "Right of the People".
    So Pandion, your task is to Show that the Gov has "Rights". If you can not, then it is more than abundantly clear that the right to bear arms is a right of the People ...AKA. U.S. Citizens.
    I apologize to anyone waiting on a response from me. I am experiencing a time warp, suddenly their are not enough hours in a day. As soon as I find a replacement part to my flux capacitor regulator, time should resume it's normal flow.

  14. #14
    I've been given a "timeout"

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    centered and balanced in all things... except a minor compulsion to have the last word.
    Posts
    540
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 2nd Amendment

    Quote Originally Posted by FruitandNut View Post
    Regulated (peoples') Militia = National Guard, or in the case of the UK = Territorial Army (The Territorials).

    Source?

  15. #15
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    234
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 2nd Amendment

    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    Yes it does.
    You're being obtuse and silly. The Constitution talks about a Militia that is armed, trained and disciplined by Congress, subject to call to active status and under the command of the President. That doesn't seem strangely like what has happened to our National Guard troops in Iraq to you? Why aren't you in Iraq?
    The fact is "militia" didn't refer to the national guard in any way shape or form.
    It does now as was pointed out by mican333 by posting Section 311 of U.S. Code. (By the way, the reference should be United States Code, Title 10, Subtitle A, Part I, Chapter 13, Section 311. And the date supplied by mican333 of 01/19/04 is not the date that that particular section was entered into U.S. Code, but the date of the last update of the web site.) Of course, it wasn't called the National Guard when the 2nd Amendment was passed.

    Further evidence that the word Militia now means is in U.S. Code, Title 10, Subtitle 3, Part IV, Chapter 659, Section 7853. That section specifies that a Militia member is relieved from Militia service upon being called to active service. The clear implication is that there is some sort of service obligation to the Militia. In other words, not just some silly duffus citizen that gets called up. The draft was not a calling up of Militia. Dan Quayle and George W. Bush both had political strings pulled to get them into the Militia at a time when our cannon fodder was supplied by mandatory service by all physically able males who lacked the political strings or the money to get a deferment for college.
    Also, it is not the gov responsibility to provide you with the ability to use a right.
    That doesn't make sense. The Constitution states that it is the responsibility of Congress to arm the Militia. Are you telling me that the government didn't give you your M-16? I still have my M-14 from my Militia days, and my older son (never served a day in the Military, active or Reserve or National Guard) was sent his as a member of the unorganized militia when he turned 18. So did my younger son, which weapon he took off with him when he enlisted in the Army (still there - SSGT).
    That is up to the person.
    Not according to the 2nd Amendment. The right to bear arms is a right of the people. "The People" in revolutionary and early documents of the U.S. is never a reference to individuals unless it specifically says so - as in "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,.." from the IV Amendment.
    The Gov doesn't buy pen and paper for every citizen. Nor does it give people money so they can pursue happiness.
    But the Constitution doesn't say that it is the responsibility of government to do so. The Constitution does specifically state that it is the responsibility of Congress to train, arm, and discipline the Militia.
    Support?
    The Constitution ("the people" as opposed to "persons" - very meaningful if you had a clue), the Virginia Constitution of 1776 that I cited earlier that was the source of the 2nd Amendment (through James Madison), and the U.S. Code previously cited.
    In fact article 1 section 8 at a glance defines two diffrent [sic] things.
    Article 1, Section 8 defines many more things than two. It is a statement of the Powers of Congress. Sadly, you only read at a glance rather than for understanding.
    It says to call forth the militia? Where is this militia being called from?
    The citizens that have been trained and armed and who are subject to being called up and are subject to discipline as decided by Congress. That is the UCMJ, by the way.
    Hint Hint.. the people are the militia.
    So you are claiming that I am part of the Militia? Am I subject to being "called forth" by Congress? I think that I am one of the people of the United States since I live here, have a passport that says that I am a citizen, and am allowed to vote. Am I a member of this unorganized militia? Hey! I've had guns all of my life. I grew up in a state where it was legal to carry a weapon, as long as it was not concealed. I now live in a state where it is legal to carry a concealed weapon with a license. I have never had a problem with either policy.
    The Gov is just calling them, and training them, and arming them while under Gov employ.
    Cart before the horse. Once they are called, they are no longer Militia. According to the Constitution, training, arming, and discipline comes first.
    Look at the wording.. "Calling forth The Militia". As though it exists before it is called.
    Indeed! The exact meaning. The Militia, by definition, is a body of armed trained citizens - in fact, armed by Congress (although we learned in Iraq that they are insufficiently armed for modern warfare).
    In fact, they are calling forth Citizens. Not to be in the militia, but because they ARE the militia.
    Exactly. They are calling forth the National Guard, citizens who have been trained and armed by Congress and have been called forth to serve in Iraq without further training or arming.
    No, it shows that while the Militia is called it is to answer to the president.
    So you do understand that the Militia isn't the rabble of armed civilians. It is a body of trained and armed citizens subject to the call of Congress and the President.
    Also, you have to remember that unless the Constitution says you can't do it, then the right is preserved for the people.
    That's so perfectly ignorant of what the Constitution states and so completely backwards that it is funny. Look up and actually read the 9th and 10th Amendments.
    As all rights are First the Citizens, and then from the Citizens given to the Gov.
    No. The People. You need to educate yourself about what the founding fathers meant by citizens, persons, and the people.
    Read the link, and what the founding fathers said.
    I actually don't have to. I have been reading the founding fathers and about the founding fathers for some 40 years. Nevertheless, who actually gives a rat's tootie about your out of context quotes that apply to an age 250 years ago? They are not in the Constitution and aren't relevant. The question before the Supreme Court is how the Constitution and Amendments apply today.
    Proof? Link?
    In fact is seems clear the opposite is true.
    I see that you are mostly ignorant of the principles on which this country was founded, as well as the history.
    Just so you can see.
    Why do you imagine that I would have a problem with that? "The people" does not indicate individual rights. Your understanding of English seems lacking. People is not the plural of person. It isn't now and never has been - 'person' v. 'persons' and 'people' v. 'peoples'. Learn English.
    Key words are "Right of the People".
    Exactly! The rights of the people to assemble (try it alone if you think it is an individual right). 'People' means all citizens collectively, as in "We the People of the United States."
    So Pandion, your task is to Show that the Gov has "Rights".
    Why on earth would that be my task? I never made any such claim, and in fact, angrily oppose any such claim. The current administration claims that it is the right of government to 'monitor' citizens in case they might not agree with government policy. Government has no rights - only responsibilities. Sadly, our government cant even meet its responsibilities and thus falls back on some claim of rights.
    If you can not, then it is more than abundantly clear that the right to bear arms is a right of the People ...AKA. U.S. Citizens.
    In fact, I did debunk your uneducated views. So that means that must necessarily mean that the right to bear arms is not a right of individual citizens, but rather a right of the states to form Militias - the people - as is clear to anyone who has actually read and studied the whole Constitution. Rights granted to "the People" are not rights granted to each individual.

    So now the question is up to the Supreme Court. They may come down on your side or they may come down on mine. They may also cop out and come out with a less than decisive opinion. Given the nature of the Court (4 ultra conservatives, one conservative, and 4 moderates), I suspect that I'm going to be packing my piece every day in less than a year.
    From The Treaty of Tripoli, Art. 11, negociated under Washington, passed unanimously by the senate, and signed by Adams -- "As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion;"

  16. #16
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Sheffield, S.Yorks., UK
    Posts
    8,862
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 2nd Amendment

    In the Hungarian Uprising we had a so-called popular uprising. In reality most of the population although against the regime at the time, and hostile to Russian 'occupation'/interference, were either against an armed insurrection or at least non-commital. The insurrection was uncoordinated with the various groups often taking independent action that was 'counterproductive' in tactical and strategic terms. Importantly there was no single group or individual representing what was happening that could negotiate terms of settlement and peace with the opposing side. This situation usually leads to unnecessarily protracted fighting, or a more vigourous and brutal reflex reaction by the government/regime.

    Disorganised/uncoordinated groups also have a habit of fragmenting into further bloody/bloodier conflict with eachother once their common enemy is put to flight/defeated; as happened for instance after the French Revolution, the Russian Revolution, and the Irish (unnecessary as it happens) War for Home Rule. All in all, mobs coming out on the street with weapons of all kinds of calibres and capability, and ill versed in the discipline required to mount a coordinated attempt at insurrection, are usually a liability. So-called accidents and blue on blue situations are often more frequent in such cases.

    Come clean guys, you just love fr*ggin guns, period! It is kind of like a long hood on an automobile being a subliminal penis extension. {It is probably why I like the shape of an E-type Jaguar!]
    Last edited by FruitandNut; November 21st, 2007 at 11:31 PM. Reason: Typo
    "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." - Anais Nin.
    Emitte lucem et veritatem - Send out light and truth.
    'Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt' - Julius Caesar (rough translation, 'Men will think what they want to think')
    Kill my boss? Do I dare live out the American dream? - Homer Simpson.

  17. #17
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    234
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 2nd Amendment

    Quote Originally Posted by FruitandNut View Post
    In the Hungarian Uprising we had a so-called popular uprising. In reality most of the population although against the regime at the time, and hostile to Russian 'occupation'/interference, were either against an armed insurrection or at least non-commital. The insurrection was uncoordinated with the various groups often taking independent action that was 'counterproductive' in tactical and strategic terms. Importantly there was no single group or individual representing what was happening that could negotiate terms of settlement and peace with the opposing side. This situation usually leads to unnecessarily protracted fighting, or a more vigourous and brutal reflex reaction by the government/regime.

    Disorganised/uncoordinated groups also have a habit of fragmenting into further bloody/bloodier conflict with eachother once their common enemy is put to flight/defeated; as happened for instance after the French Revolution, the Russian Revolution, and the Irish (unnecessary as it happens) War for Home Rule.
    While interesting, I fail to see how this is relevant to the question of a Constitutional right to bear arms in the United States. In fact, have you ever read the Constitution of the United States? Thus, while your remarks may be interesting, they are not relevant to the discussion.

    Please, if you can't address then topic the bug off.
    From The Treaty of Tripoli, Art. 11, negociated under Washington, passed unanimously by the senate, and signed by Adams -- "As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion;"

  18. #18
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Sheffield, S.Yorks., UK
    Posts
    8,862
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 2nd Amendment

    pan - Oh, touchy, touchy! The post was entirely relevant to the thread, in reinforcing the argument that a regulated/organised militia is one thing, and that an unorganised one is another.

    Now you bug off and have a good holiday shooting critters!
    "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." - Anais Nin.
    Emitte lucem et veritatem - Send out light and truth.
    'Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt' - Julius Caesar (rough translation, 'Men will think what they want to think')
    Kill my boss? Do I dare live out the American dream? - Homer Simpson.

  19. #19
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    234
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 2nd Amendment

    Quote Originally Posted by FruitandNut View Post
    pan - Oh, touchy, touchy! The post was entirely relevant to the thread,
    First of all, I am not pan (a mythological deity). I am pandion, a raptor. If you wish to slight my handle then I will feel free to refer to you as either "the fruit" or "the fruit cake."

    Secondly, your post had no relevance to the Constitution of the U.S.
    in reinforcing the argument that a regulated/organised militia is one thing, and that an unorganised one is another.
    Nevertheless, irrelevant, since it is of no importance to the interpretation of the Constitution of the United States by the Supreme Court of the United States. Anything that happened in Hungary is irrelevant to the question. My bet is that the decision of the Supreme Court will not cite any president from Hungary.
    Now you bug off and have a good holiday shooting critters!
    Why be an ass, even if you are Hungarian?
    From The Treaty of Tripoli, Art. 11, negociated under Washington, passed unanimously by the senate, and signed by Adams -- "As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion;"

  20. #20
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Sheffield, S.Yorks., UK
    Posts
    8,862
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 2nd Amendment

    pandion - You obviously do not have much of a sense of humour or irony etc.

    1/ pan would have been spelled with a capital/upper case P if I was going to make some connect with the mythical god you refer to.

    2/ The 2nd Ammendment refers to 'A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Which I believe both myself and others pointed to. Since the rest of the sentence does not have any colon or semi-colon, what follows refers to the said militia and not individual ad hoc private gun collections. The later modified version still alludes to a well regulated militia and intimates that through this the citizen is secured the right to bear arms in the defence/security of the State/Nation} 'A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.' ('militia has lost it's capitalisation and comma)

    3/ What happened in other countries are indeed relevant to the argument, since it throws up questions and concerns that can be mirrored in any US insurrection.

    ps. Who said I was Hungarian? I haven't. If I do have Magyar ancestry, it certainly lies hundreds of years back.
    "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." - Anais Nin.
    Emitte lucem et veritatem - Send out light and truth.
    'Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt' - Julius Caesar (rough translation, 'Men will think what they want to think')
    Kill my boss? Do I dare live out the American dream? - Homer Simpson.

 

 
Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Burn De Flag?
    By Dr. Gonzo in forum Politics
    Replies: 109
    Last Post: April 11th, 2008, 07:00 PM
  2. 2nd Amendment, redux
    By CliveStaples in forum Social Issues
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: March 20th, 2007, 02:27 PM
  3. Flag-Burning Amendment
    By emtee10 in forum Social Issues
    Replies: 56
    Last Post: January 28th, 2005, 04:05 AM
  4. Abusing the 2nd amendment
    By Zhavric in forum Social Issues
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: December 9th, 2004, 01:15 PM
  5. Kerry and the 14th Amendment
    By KneeLess in forum Politics
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: October 13th, 2004, 07:09 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •