Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 4567 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 63

Thread: Federal judge OKs D.C.'s latest set of gun-control laws

  1. #51
    Educator Alvin T. Grey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Dublin
    Last Seen
    10-08-10 @ 07:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    839

    Re: Federal judge OKs D.C.'s latest set of gun-control laws

    [quote=TurtleDude;1058653630]
    Quote Originally Posted by Alvin T. Grey View Post

    LOL another person clueless about what well regulated means in the context of the amendment.

    You are so wrong it is not funny. If you were right the second part of the amendment would say the right of the state to keep and arm militias shall not be infringed

    since you seem so well versed in the constitution, point me to the clause that delegated-to the federal government-the power to regulate small arms

    me-I only taught the subject at a couple law schools

    you?
    It doesn't control the arms. it states the reason for personal posession of arms. That being in order to provide for the common defence. Which is what a malitia is in this instance. And said malitia should be well regulated. So where does that lead?
    Big Daddy Gubment knows who you are, where you are, what you have and where you keep it. Otherwise it's impossible for them to regulate worth ****.

  2. #52
    Global Moderator
    The Hammer of Chaos
    Goshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Dixie
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,157

    Re: Federal judge OKs D.C.'s latest set of gun-control laws

    Quote Originally Posted by Alvin T. Grey View Post
    It doesn't control the arms. it states the reason for personal posession of arms. That being in order to provide for the common defence. Which is what a malitia is in this instance. And said malitia should be well regulated. So where does that lead?
    Big Daddy Gubment knows who you are, where you are, what you have and where you keep it. Otherwise it's impossible for them to regulate worth ****.

    Actually a number of scholars have stated that the military useage of "well regulated" in the late 1700's referred to a military force that was properly armed and equipped and ready for battle, rather than the modern meaning of "regulated".

    Given that the Founders made it quite clear that "the militia" meant "all free men capable of bearing arms", who were considered "the unorganized militia", they could not be regulated in the modern sense because they were, in fact, unorganized until needed.
    Last edited by Goshin; 03-31-10 at 05:55 PM.

    Fiddling While Rome Burns
    ISIS: Carthago Delenda Est
    "I used to roll the dice; see the fear in my enemies' eyes... listen as the crowd would sing, 'now the old king is dead, Long Live the King.'.."

  3. #53
    Global Moderator
    The Hammer of Chaos
    Goshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Dixie
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,157

    Re: Federal judge OKs D.C.'s latest set of gun-control laws

    Quote Originally Posted by Alvin T. Grey View Post
    You are not the militia in the same way as everyone between the ages of 18-45 is not a hooker.

    In both cases you meet the qualifications, but only a certain few actually are.
    The Founders had a slightly different view.


    What the Founders of the US said about guns:
    Benjamin Franklin: Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary
    safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." (Nov 11 1755, from the Pennsylvania Assembly's reply to
    the Governor of Pennsylvania.)

    Thomas Jefferson: "Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither
    inclined or determined to commit crimes. Such laws only make things worse for the assaulted and
    better for the assassins; they serve to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man
    may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man
    ." (1764 Letter and speech from T.
    Jefferson quoting with approval an essay by Cesare Beccari)

    John Adams: "Arms in the hands of citizens may be used at individual discretion in private self
    defense.
    " (A defense of the Constitution of the US)

    George Washington: "Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the
    people's liberty teeth (and) keystone... the rifle and the pistol are equally indispensable... more than
    99% of them [guns] by their silence indicate that they are in safe and sane hands. The very
    atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference [crime]. When firearms go, all goes,
    we need them every hour." (Address to 1st session of Congress)

    George Mason: "To disarm the people is the most effectual way to enslave them." (3 Elliot,
    Debates at 380)

    Noah Webster: "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in
    almost every country in Europe
    ." (1787, Pamphlets on the Constitution of the US)

    George Washington: "A free people ought to be armed." (Jan 14 1790, Boston Independent
    Chronicle.)

    Thomas Jefferson: "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." (T. Jefferson papers,
    334, C.J. Boyd, Ed. 1950)

    James Madison: "Americans have the right and advantage of being armed, unlike the people of
    other countries, whose people are afraid to trust them with arms.
    " (Federalist Paper #46)

    On what is the militia:

    George Mason: "I ask you sir, who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people." (Elliott,
    Debates, 425-426)

    Richard Henry Lee: "A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves...and
    include all men capable of bearing arms
    ." (Additional letters from the Federal Farmer, at 169, 1788)

    James Madison: "A well regulated militia, composed of the people, trained to arms, is the
    best and most natural defense of a free country." (1st Annals of Congress, at 434, June 8th 1789,
    emphasis added.

    IMPORTANT NOTE: Back in the 18th century, a "regular" army meant an army that had
    standard military equipment. So a "well regulated" army was simply one that was "well equipped." It
    does NOT refer to a professional army. The 17th century folks used the term "STANDING Army"
    to describe a professional army. THEREFORE, "a well regulated militia" only means a well equipped
    militia. It does not imply the modern meaning of "regulated," which means controlled or administered
    by some superior entity. Federal control over the militia comes from other parts of the Constitution,
    but not from the second amendment.

    Patrick Henry: "The people have a right to keep and bear arms." (Elliott, Debates at 185)

    Alexander Hamilton: "...that standing army can never be formidable (threatening) to the liberties
    of the people, while there is a large body of citizens, little if at all inferior to them in the use of arms."
    (Federalist Paper #29)

    "Little more can be aimed at with respect to the people at large than to have them properly armed
    and equipped
    ." (Id) {responding to the claim that the militia itself could threaten liberty}" There is
    something so far-fetched, and so extravagant in the idea of danger of liberty from the militia that one
    is at a loss whether to treat it with gravity or raillery (mockery). (Id)

    Fiddling While Rome Burns
    ISIS: Carthago Delenda Est
    "I used to roll the dice; see the fear in my enemies' eyes... listen as the crowd would sing, 'now the old king is dead, Long Live the King.'.."

  4. #54
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,751

    Re: Federal judge OKs D.C.'s latest set of gun-control laws

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    That's not select fire.
    Select fire would make it an automatic or 3 short burst.

    It fires a 22 cartridge, which is not intermediate.

    What difference does it make that it is magazine fed?
    You do know that the vast majority of crimes are committed with hand guns, don't you?



    What about these two?
    What's wrong with them?
    They're scary looking! BAN THEM.
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  5. #55
    Sage
    VanceMack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    54,649

    Re: Federal judge OKs D.C.'s latest set of gun-control laws

    [quote=Alvin T. Grey;1058651784]
    Quote Originally Posted by LaMidRighter View Post

    You are not the militia in the same way as everyone between the ages of 18-45 is not a hooker.

    In both cases you meet the qualifications, but only a certain few actually are.
    You actually might want to review what the US Code lists as 'the militia'.

  6. #56
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Naperville, IL
    Last Seen
    09-24-12 @ 02:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    11,963

    Re: Federal judge OKs D.C.'s latest set of gun-control laws

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    Do you support warrantless phone taps?

    I've owned guns since I was 18, to date 0 people have been threatened or harmed by those guns.
    And no I don't think I'm Rambo.
    Warrantless wiretaps? Start a thread and talk about it. That has nothing to do with this thread.

    And if every gun owner had your track record of 0 people being harmed, we wouldn't need gun laws, would we?

  7. #57
    Sage
    jamesrage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A place where common sense exists
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 09:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    31,067

    Re: Federal judge OKs D.C.'s latest set of gun-control laws

    Quote Originally Posted by hazlnut View Post
    Warrantless wiretaps? Start a thread and talk about it. That has nothing to do with this thread.

    And if every gun owner had your track record of 0 people being harmed, we wouldn't need gun laws, would we?
    If you support the infringement of one right then why not another? Especially if you want to use the technology argument as a reason for that infringement.
    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"

    Cicero Marcus Tullius

  8. #58
    Klattu Verata Nicto
    LaMidRighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Louisiana
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    30,534

    Re: Federal judge OKs D.C.'s latest set of gun-control laws

    Quote Originally Posted by hazlnut View Post
    Warrantless wiretaps? Start a thread and talk about it. That has nothing to do with this thread.

    And if every gun owner had your track record of 0 people being harmed, we wouldn't need gun laws, would we?
    All rights are interrelated, then again I've never seen you default on the side of rights, so I can see how you don't understand this.
    Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.

    LMR

  9. #59
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:58 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,606

    Re: Federal judge OKs D.C.'s latest set of gun-control laws

    Quote Originally Posted by hazlnut View Post
    Warrantless wiretaps? Start a thread and talk about it. That has nothing to do with this thread.

    And if every gun owner had your track record of 0 people being harmed, we wouldn't need gun laws, would we?
    libs want or need gun laws to hassle gun owners

    public safety has nothing to do with what motivates people like Schumer, Sugarmann or the Brady Bunch



  10. #60
    Sage
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    09-01-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,955

    Re: Federal judge OKs D.C.'s latest set of gun-control laws

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    They're scary looking! BAN THEM.
    They are the exact same gun I showed in the first picture, they just had some body modifications to look "cool."

    The function is all the same.
    They are more or less novelty target shooters.
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    —Adam Shepard

Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 4567 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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