It's only an assault weapon if you are wearing assault clothing while using it.lain:
View attachment 21167
assault weapons
- Thread starter lighthouse99
- Start date
View attachment 21167
lighthouse99
New member
when the liberals speak, it is like an assault weapon
:sozo:
:sozo:
genuineoriginal
New member
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
us conservatives need to have our own liberal slaves to counteract them
genuineoriginal
New member
The constitution of the United States established that the power of military force for the United States would reside in the militia maintained and commanded by each individual State.
One exception was a Navy, the other exception was a limited power to raise an army for no longer than a two year period.
_____
"The Congress shall have Power To ...raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years....
ARTICLE I, SECTION 8, CLAUSE 12
_____
"The Congress shall have Power To ...raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years....
ARTICLE I, SECTION 8, CLAUSE 12
_____
In order to make sure that each State remained free from domestic enemies, the militia must have the power to fight against the militia of any of the other States and any army raised by the federal government in opposition to the constitution.
This was elaborated upon by James Madison in Federalist No. 46.
_____
Let a regular army, fully equal to the resources of the country, be formed; and let it be entirely at the devotion of the federal government; still it would not be going too far to say, that the State governments, with the people on their side, would be able to repel the danger. The highest number to which, according to the best computation, a standing army can be carried in any country, does not exceed one hundredth part of the whole number of souls; or one twenty-fifth part of the number able to bear arms. This proportion would not yield, in the United States, an army of more than twenty-five or thirty thousand men. To these would be opposed a militia amounting to near half a million of citizens with arms in their hands, officered by men chosen from among themselves, fighting for their common liberties, and united and conducted by governments possessing their affections and confidence. It may well be doubted, whether a militia thus circumstanced could ever be conquered by such a proportion of regular troops. Those who are best acquainted with the last successful resistance of this country against the British arms, will be most inclined to deny the possibility of it. Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. And it is not certain, that with this aid alone they would not be able to shake off their yokes. But were the people to possess the additional advantages of local governments chosen by themselves, who could collect the national will and direct the national force, and of officers appointed out of the militia, by these governments, and attached both to them and to the militia, it may be affirmed with the greatest assurance, that the throne of every tyranny in Europe would be speedily overturned in spite of the legions which surround it.
_____
Let a regular army, fully equal to the resources of the country, be formed; and let it be entirely at the devotion of the federal government; still it would not be going too far to say, that the State governments, with the people on their side, would be able to repel the danger. The highest number to which, according to the best computation, a standing army can be carried in any country, does not exceed one hundredth part of the whole number of souls; or one twenty-fifth part of the number able to bear arms. This proportion would not yield, in the United States, an army of more than twenty-five or thirty thousand men. To these would be opposed a militia amounting to near half a million of citizens with arms in their hands, officered by men chosen from among themselves, fighting for their common liberties, and united and conducted by governments possessing their affections and confidence. It may well be doubted, whether a militia thus circumstanced could ever be conquered by such a proportion of regular troops. Those who are best acquainted with the last successful resistance of this country against the British arms, will be most inclined to deny the possibility of it. Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. And it is not certain, that with this aid alone they would not be able to shake off their yokes. But were the people to possess the additional advantages of local governments chosen by themselves, who could collect the national will and direct the national force, and of officers appointed out of the militia, by these governments, and attached both to them and to the militia, it may be affirmed with the greatest assurance, that the throne of every tyranny in Europe would be speedily overturned in spite of the legions which surround it.
_____
No it doesn't. The bill of rights is about the people, not the governments of the states.
Yes, this is the DoD. Not a militia as told in the bill of rights for the people. The right to not have your free exercise of religion regulated. Same thing.
Take a history course. Then take a Constitutional law course.
Are you suggesting that there can be no regulation on any of the Bill of Rights freedoms?
There are regulations, and plenty of them but, your president refuses to enforce existing laws, because he does not respect the law himself.
Hardly....
Anyone with Reagan's record of raising taxes 11 times, supporting the Brady Bill, a ban on assault rifles, mandating background checks and an amnesty for undocumented workers would have been condemned by his fellow conservatives and booed off the stage!
You are correct. Two points to bear in mind:
1. You wrote that it is their personal weapons. It is not clear from the amendment itself that that is what is meant.
2. How many people who "bear arms" in the US today belong to a State Militia?
zoo22
Well-known member
Does sitting around eating Cheetos, posting pictures of your favorite guns on Christian forums and complaining about Obama count as "belonging to a State Militia"?
CherubRam
New member
You would see STATE Militias pop up over night in America if there was a need. Minute Men are the general public.
Last edited:
We are talking about State Militia, not local vigilante groups.
CherubRam
New member
It is amazing how polarized our country is because John F. Kennedy (a Democrat) was as good of a conservative as anyone...Lowered taxes, very religious, hated communists, anti abortion (called abortion "repugnant"), attempted welfare reform, was fiscally conservative except for military spending :up:, called Al Gore Sr. a "SOB", the list goes on...yet, the far left & far Right want a form of socialism/marxism, the rest of us desire constitutional conservatism and only one candidate is espousing that position...and it aint Trump.
Last edited:
This Charming Manc
Well-known member
Does that include radicalised muslim citizens?
Crimially insane citizens?
Criminal citizens
Radical left wing ones who want top overthrow democracy?
Crimially insane citizens?
Criminal citizens
Radical left wing ones who want top overthrow democracy?