The proper response to lib's should be this when they try to mix Militia with the people.
"So, the definition and use of the comma is lost on you.
The 2nd Amendment is a singular sentence incorporating four separate thoughts, three being rights and one restriction, which the Federal Government cannot infringe.
#1..."A well regulated Militia," (comma). This tells the government they cannot prevent a State from forming an armed Militia.
#2..."being necessary to the security of a free State," (comma). This tells the government they cannot prevent States from utilizing "self help" in the preservation and maintenance their freedom.
#3..."the right of the people to keep and bear Arms," (comma). This tells the government, they have no authority to prevent people from possessing and maintaining Arms.
#4..."shall not be infringed." (period) This restricts the government from infringing the three rights mentioned above...PERIOD!.
Unfortunately for liberals and statists alike the case for the AR15 was settled in 1939, when the Supreme Court ruled..."Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment,". The operative phrase here is "ordinary military equipment", making the AR15 the most compatible of all weapons to be possessed and maintained for use when the barbarians storm the gate. Why? Parts are interchangeable, ammunition is readily supplied through normal channels when push comes to shove.
Liberals always have this delusional thinking they can mix oil and water and expect all will be right with the world, as their statement..."Great...have everyone join their local militia and drill/train once a month..". This is simplistic thinking on their part, because the right to form a Militia does not mean a State has to. Even if a State has their NG or Reserve contingent, when the SHTF, the normal response time for these well regulated entities may take a day or two leaving the unregulated citizens on their own. When the regulated entities do arrive on the scene, they will have the ability to resupply the unregulated citizens with fresh ammunition, once again making the case for the AR15. In a more sinister application, if the well regulated entities turn against the unregulated citizens, then the well regulated become resupply pods for the citizens at large. I would suspect this to be the real reason for want of the statists to abolish "ordinary military equipment" being in the possession of civilians...it scares the B-Jesus out of them."
I suppose they will issue an illegal law to ban it after many of us already own it..Ala CT and their unconstitutional Mag law and the scary black rifle law
When, not if, the great collapse begins, body armor will be very valuable. Body armor, I think gives you better odds against hollow point rounds, which are designed for unarmored targets. Frankly, with the purchase of all the hollow point rounds supposedely to "save money", I am surprised there haven't been more screams to also ban body armor, which could help even the odds when the hollow point rounds are arrayed against us.
Being necessary to the security of a free state means more than just state governments (.or even the federal government) calling forth the militia.
A FREE STATE translates to "state of freedom" as well. This is where the "core" of self defense is rested! For a persons state of being to be secure - in the moment- that person must secure their state of being themselves. (Police cannot be everywhere all the time.)
I only offer this to augment the post above BECAUSE set up just as it is, statists will point to it as a means of state governments to usurp authority not delegated to it. REMEMBER, the right is enumerated as SOLEY left to the PEOPLE, meaning state government cannot claim authority via the tenth amendment.
Individual enumerated right. Period. SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. period. That means NO LAWS regarding ownership, sales, purchases, possession, carriage whether open or concealed and even uses constituting self defense and defense of country is valid. Not ONE.
Yes, governments at all levels can craft, implement and prosecute a great many laws regarding abuses and even beneficial uses - provided those laws are OUTSIDE the RIGHTS.
We need gun laws - directed at the GUILTY and intended upon punishing those who violate the rights of another. ( note - there is no right not to be offended and there is no right not to be irrationally scared).
7 comments:
But ... but ...but! It is so dificult for government snipers to kill unarmed peasants wo insist on wearing body armour.
Therefore it MUST be prohibited (except for government agents who just want to go home safe ... after killing peasants)...
III
And another has proposed gun registration. (Rep Cassidy (D) Chicago)
Illinois HB4715...
The proper response to lib's should be this when they try to mix Militia with the people.
"So, the definition and use of the comma is lost on you.
The 2nd Amendment is a singular sentence incorporating four separate thoughts, three being rights and one restriction, which the Federal Government cannot infringe.
#1..."A well regulated Militia," (comma). This tells the government they cannot prevent a State from forming an armed Militia.
#2..."being necessary to the security of a free State," (comma). This tells the government they cannot prevent States from utilizing "self help" in the preservation and maintenance their freedom.
#3..."the right of the people to keep and bear Arms," (comma). This tells the government, they have no authority to prevent people from possessing and maintaining Arms.
#4..."shall not be infringed." (period) This restricts the government from infringing the three rights mentioned above...PERIOD!.
Unfortunately for liberals and statists alike the case for the AR15 was settled in 1939, when the Supreme Court ruled..."Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment,". The operative phrase here is "ordinary military equipment", making the AR15 the most compatible of all weapons to be possessed and maintained for use when the barbarians storm the gate. Why? Parts are interchangeable, ammunition is readily supplied through normal channels when push comes to shove.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/307/174
Liberals always have this delusional thinking they can mix oil and water and expect all will be right with the world, as their statement..."Great...have everyone join their local militia and drill/train once a month..". This is simplistic thinking on their part, because the right to form a Militia does not mean a State has to. Even if a State has their NG or Reserve contingent, when the SHTF, the normal response time for these well regulated entities may take a day or two leaving the unregulated citizens on their own. When the regulated entities do arrive on the scene, they will have the ability to resupply the unregulated citizens with fresh ammunition, once again making the case for the AR15. In a more sinister application, if the well regulated entities turn against the unregulated citizens, then the well regulated become resupply pods for the citizens at large. I would suspect this to be the real reason for want of the statists to abolish "ordinary military equipment" being in the possession of civilians...it scares the B-Jesus out of them."
I suppose they will issue an illegal law to ban it after many of us already own it..Ala CT and their unconstitutional Mag law and the scary black rifle law
Here you go: :)
http://www.daybydaycartoon.com/2014/03/05/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+daybydaycartoon%2FkUnt+%28Day+by+Day+Cartoon+by+Chris+Muir%29#007298
When, not if, the great collapse begins, body armor will be very valuable. Body armor, I think gives you better odds against hollow point rounds, which are designed for unarmored targets. Frankly, with the purchase of all the hollow point rounds supposedely to "save money", I am surprised there haven't been more screams to also ban body armor, which could help even the odds when the hollow point rounds are arrayed against us.
Being necessary to the security of a free state means more than just state governments (.or even the federal government) calling forth the militia.
A FREE STATE translates to "state of freedom" as well.
This is where the "core" of self defense is rested! For a persons state of being to be secure - in the moment- that person must secure their state of being themselves. (Police cannot be everywhere all the time.)
I only offer this to augment the post above BECAUSE set up just as it is, statists will point to it as a means of state governments to usurp authority not delegated to it. REMEMBER, the right is enumerated as SOLEY left to the PEOPLE, meaning state government cannot claim authority via the tenth amendment.
Individual enumerated right. Period. SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. period. That means NO LAWS regarding ownership, sales, purchases, possession, carriage whether open or concealed and even uses constituting self defense and defense of country is valid. Not ONE.
Yes, governments at all levels can craft, implement and prosecute a great many laws regarding abuses and even beneficial uses - provided those laws are OUTSIDE the RIGHTS.
We need gun laws - directed at the GUILTY and intended upon punishing those who violate the rights of another. ( note - there is no right not to be offended and there is no right not to be irrationally scared).
Post a Comment