Steelplate
New member
"WELL REGULATED militia"
Fact
- Thread starter Howey
- Start date
"WELL REGULATED militia"
SmarterthanYou
rebel
now, tell us what the founders meant by 'well regulated'.
Steelplate
New member
It meant regulated...it is English.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
dodge number 1. tell us what the founders meant by 'well regulated'
Steelplate
New member
Organized and under the auspices of the newly formed United States. The National Guard took the place of militias.
Canceled.2014.1
New member
According to the SCOTUS the 2nd amendment is not contingent on serving in any military.
Steelplate
New member
Great, according to SCOTUS, Obamacare is Constitutional, Roe v. Wade is Constitutional too....but I don't hear Conservatives shutting up about either of those two Constitutional items.
Canceled.2014.1
New member
I also don't see you accepting that gun ownership is a constitutional right that does not hinge on participation in any military service.
Of course, because conservatives tend not to like either of the two things you mentioned ... though this conservative isn't totally agains a form of universal healthcare. So they keep looking for avenues to tweak/eliminate them just as liberals don't like the court's rulling on the 2nd ammendment and so they keep looking for avenues to tweak/eliminate that. It's what makes the world go 'round.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
you've gotten a very bad education then. It is the height of stupidity to believe that the framers of the constitution would pen a right of standing armies, even part time ones, to keep and bear arms after they had just fought a government with a standing army that tried to take theirs. On top of that, the bill of rights is exactly that. no law or definition can change the right.
Steelplate
New member
BTW, no one bothered to answer my question that I posed last night about inner city gun violence. Can I assume that there's a huge sense of apathy on the subject? If so, THAT'S why this subject keeps coming up.
It's not the Sandy Hooks or Auroras that keep driving this debate... they just help because they are high profile instances. It's the 30k deaths EVERY YEAR by way of firearms that no one gives a shit about because the people that it affects are poor and have a different skin tone.
If you missed it, I'll recap. There's two basic ways of doing it, in my mind anyway.
1. Force businesses to invest in our inner cities so that these folk have something to work for and take pride in....this will cost money and it will take time....tax incentives... carrot rather than stick, of course.
2. Declare crime gangs Domestic Terrorists. Temporarily Suspend Posse Comitatus. Send our troops in and collect all illegal weapons. This would require a National Registry....so that a person would have the paperwork to prove that their weapons are legal. This of course, is our worst nightmare come true. However, if it would be done this way, we could do away with the silly notion of "banning any gun....you want a .50 caliber Machine Gun mounted on your Jeep? Go for it. You want an M60 mounted on your four wheeler? Cool....just register it.
Like I said last night... those are two solutions to end the gun control debate. I also asked for other ideas...so far? Nothing.
It's not the Sandy Hooks or Auroras that keep driving this debate... they just help because they are high profile instances. It's the 30k deaths EVERY YEAR by way of firearms that no one gives a shit about because the people that it affects are poor and have a different skin tone.
If you missed it, I'll recap. There's two basic ways of doing it, in my mind anyway.
1. Force businesses to invest in our inner cities so that these folk have something to work for and take pride in....this will cost money and it will take time....tax incentives... carrot rather than stick, of course.
2. Declare crime gangs Domestic Terrorists. Temporarily Suspend Posse Comitatus. Send our troops in and collect all illegal weapons. This would require a National Registry....so that a person would have the paperwork to prove that their weapons are legal. This of course, is our worst nightmare come true. However, if it would be done this way, we could do away with the silly notion of "banning any gun....you want a .50 caliber Machine Gun mounted on your Jeep? Go for it. You want an M60 mounted on your four wheeler? Cool....just register it.
Like I said last night... those are two solutions to end the gun control debate. I also asked for other ideas...so far? Nothing.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
this isn't necessarily true. the cause of the violence there isn't because guns are plentiful. It's due to other issues that need to be resolved.
force? how do you plan to do that?
guaranteed to increase the body count to include otherwise law abiding citizens.
Steelplate
New member
Yes....poverty and mind numbing hopelessness.
Did you read?
The tree of liberty must be watered with blood right? Where's these people's liberty?
Still didn't see any suggestions.... only criticism. Typical.
I've long been a proponent of community and increased government involvement in the inner city. Seems like whenever the right needs to cut funds that's the first place they came from. Legitimate, productive, after school programs, educational, art, and sports ventures have died die to lack of funds. Hope of parents has fizzled away with the uncaring government cuts. It's time to do something.
Steelplate
New member
Exactly....out of sight/out of mind. But in reality, they are shooting themselves(no pun intended) in the foot. If we make our inner cities decent, safe and nice places to live again...because, let's face it....they don't have the incomes to move, they don't have the credit for capital to start their own businesses in their neighborhoods, and even if they did, what venture capitalist would touch the risk of investing in a crime riddled area?
You want to make the gun control debate go away? Get rid of the cause of the vast majority of gun violence. Like I said Sandy Hook and Aurora are just the catalyst for expanding the gun control sentiment...they are not the root of it.
There are community revitalization projects nationwide that work. That's part of what I support.
Canceled.2014.1
New member
Forcing businesses to invest in inner cities is not the way to go. First of all, I think that is outside the scope of the government's power. And second of all you just create another bureacratic nightmare and welfare system. Try giving businesses incentives to invest in inner cities and work to link them with the communities in the inner city to create a partnership that will benefit both.
As for the suspension of Posse Comitatus, I think that would be a very bad idea, if for no other reason than the precedent it sets.
Steelplate
New member
Once again....apparently some people have issues with reading comprehension. It seems like some of you stopped at the word "force". I did mentions tax incentives and using a carrot instead of a stick.
I think that same method should apply to off shoring businesses too. Throw some tax incentives at them and see if they move operations back home. If that doesn't work, which I don't think it will, it will expose the lie that the reason they moved the jobs in the first place was because of taxes. Then....if they choose not to take the carrot, the stick comes out. China's tariffs on our goods coming in is 25%. We only charge 2.5%. Perhaps reciprocation would be appropriate.
So....criticism noted.
Great idea and one that's worked. Now. Where's the money coming from? Are you ok with a government stimulus to do it with increased taxes?
Steelplate
New member
This ought to be good.