Lets just agree that the founders didn't just return from a deer hunt. They had just liberated a nation from a tyrannical government! They were only able to do so because the populace had arms and militias.
Most people don't know the shot heard around the world was due to an attempt by the Brits to disarm the colonists. They were marching to seize arms and powder stores.
We are free because of armed men who were brave enough to say "Enough" and "Never".
BidenBros say control me more daddy!
Well I did know that, and I've been to the scene.
Scalia treated "well-regulated militia" as having no effect whatsoever.
That's not proper interpretation of any written document.
What dies "well regulated" in the 2A.
Use your own words, Betty
It meant a citizen soldier militia that would avoid any necessity for a standing army. You might well be expected to defend the country; it wasn’t written to allow you to overthrow the government. It wasn’t about an individual right to own guns.
Scalia was a selective “originalist”.
It’s also to defend yourself and your natural rights if/when the government becomes tyrannical. Thomas Jefferson was the original originalist. You know this, you’re just being dishonest. Helen.
Lets just agree that the founders didn't just return from a deer hunt. They had just liberated a nation from a tyrannical government! They were only able to do so because the populace had arms and militias.
Most people don't know the shot heard around the world was due to an attempt by the Brits to disarm the colonists. They were marching to seize arms and powder stores.
We are free because of armed men who were brave enough to say "Enough" and "Never".
BidenBros say control me more daddy!
Well I did know that, and I've been to the scene.
Scalia treated "well-regulated militia" as having no effect whatsoever.
That's not proper interpretation of any written document.
What dies "well regulated" in the 2A.
Use your own words, Betty
It meant a citizen soldier militia that would avoid any necessity for a standing army. You might well be expected to defend the country; it wasn’t written to allow you to overthrow the government. It wasn’t about an individual right to own guns.
Scalia was a selective “originalist”.
All I have to say is Fuck You!
So every Supreme court ruling was wrong but you're right?
The founders actual writings say you are a stupid POS. They say that's exactly what it's for. Maybe you missed the part about the British trying to seize arms and powder stores? That's why it says what it says dimwit. Good God your two dads wasted a lot of money on your schooling!
Lets just agree that the founders didn't just return from a deer hunt. They had just liberated a nation from a tyrannical government! They were only able to do so because the populace had arms and militias.
Most people don't know the shot heard around the world was due to an attempt by the Brits to disarm the colonists. They were marching to seize arms and powder stores.
We are free because of armed men who were brave enough to say "Enough" and "Never".
BidenBros say control me more daddy!
Well I did know that, and I've been to the scene.
Scalia treated "well-regulated militia" as having no effect whatsoever.
That's not proper interpretation of any written document.
What dies "well regulated" in the 2A.
Use your own words, Betty
It meant a citizen soldier militia that would avoid any necessity for a standing army. You might well be expected to defend the country; it wasn’t written to allow you to overthrow the government. It wasn’t about an individual right to own guns.
Scalia was a selective “originalist”.
All I have to say is Fuck You!
So every Supreme court ruling was wrong but you're right?
The founders actual writings say you are a stupid POS. They say that's exactly what it's for. Maybe you missed the part about the British trying to seize arms and powder stores? That's why it says what it says dimwit. Good God your two dads wasted a lot of money on your schooling!
You really are this dumb!
We’ve already been through the shot heard round the world, lady. The founders were horrified at the idea of a standing army and preferred a militia of citizen soldiers.
Your suggestion that there is some long line of cases supporting your gundamentalist views demonstrates your ignorance, as if that was in doubt. Heller is the case in question. It was decided in 2008. It is not an exercise in originalism.
Lets just agree that the founders didn't just return from a deer hunt. They had just liberated a nation from a tyrannical government! They were only able to do so because the populace had arms and militias.
Most people don't know the shot heard around the world was due to an attempt by the Brits to disarm the colonists. They were marching to seize arms and powder stores.
We are free because of armed men who were brave enough to say "Enough" and "Never".
BidenBros say control me more daddy!
Well I did know that, and I've been to the scene.
Scalia treated "well-regulated militia" as having no effect whatsoever.
That's not proper interpretation of any written document.
What dies "well regulated" in the 2A.
Use your own words, Betty
It meant a citizen soldier militia that would avoid any necessity for a standing army. You might well be expected to defend the country; it wasn’t written to allow you to overthrow the government. It wasn’t about an individual right to own guns.
Scalia was a selective “originalist”.
It’s also to defend yourself and your natural rights if/when the government becomes tyrannical. Thomas Jefferson was the original originalist. You know this, you’re just being dishonest. Helen.
TJ is but one of the founders, Beatrice. Definitely not the only one to comment on the right to bear arms.
Lets just agree that the founders didn't just return from a deer hunt. They had just liberated a nation from a tyrannical government! They were only able to do so because the populace had arms and militias.
Most people don't know the shot heard around the world was due to an attempt by the Brits to disarm the colonists. They were marching to seize arms and powder stores.
We are free because of armed men who were brave enough to say "Enough" and "Never".
BidenBros say control me more daddy!
Well I did know that, and I've been to the scene.
Scalia treated "well-regulated militia" as having no effect whatsoever.
That's not proper interpretation of any written document.
What dies "well regulated" in the 2A.
Use your own words, Betty
It meant a citizen soldier militia that would avoid any necessity for a standing army. You might well be expected to defend the country; it wasn’t written to allow you to overthrow the government. It wasn’t about an individual right to own guns.
Scalia was a selective “originalist”.
It’s also to defend yourself and your natural rights if/when the government becomes tyrannical. Thomas Jefferson was the original originalist. You know this, you’re just being dishonest. Helen.
TJ is but one of the founders, Beatrice. Definitely not the only one to comment on the right to bear arms.
Pretty sure he is an originalist, Dorothy. More so than people you keep mentioning. So your argument is “other people said thing too”? Deep take, ma’am
Lets just agree that the founders didn't just return from a deer hunt. They had just liberated a nation from a tyrannical government! They were only able to do so because the populace had arms and militias.
Most people don't know the shot heard around the world was due to an attempt by the Brits to disarm the colonists. They were marching to seize arms and powder stores.
We are free because of armed men who were brave enough to say "Enough" and "Never".
BidenBros say control me more daddy!
Well I did know that, and I've been to the scene.
Scalia treated "well-regulated militia" as having no effect whatsoever.
That's not proper interpretation of any written document.
What dies "well regulated" in the 2A.
Use your own words, Betty
It meant a citizen soldier militia that would avoid any necessity for a standing army. You might well be expected to defend the country; it wasn’t written to allow you to overthrow the government. It wasn’t about an individual right to own guns.
Scalia was a selective “originalist”.
All I have to say is Fuck You!
So every Supreme court ruling was wrong but you're right?
The founders actual writings say you are a stupid POS. They say that's exactly what it's for. Maybe you missed the part about the British trying to seize arms and powder stores? That's why it says what it says dimwit. Good God your two dads wasted a lot of money on your schooling!
You really are this dumb!
We’ve already been through the shot heard round the world, lady. The founders were horrified at the idea of a standing army and preferred a militia of citizen soldiers.
Your suggestion that there is some long line of cases supporting your gundamentalist views demonstrates your ignorance, as if that was in doubt. Heller is the case in question. It was decided in 2008. It is not an exercise in originalism.
Why yes you really are this stupid! That law school diploma from a Cracker Jack box or the Close Cover Before Striking School of Law and Heavy Machinery?
You do realize one of the most liberal district courts in the country just ruled 18 year old's can buy any gun they want right? Struck down 21 YO bullshit. Yet the dems are all saying let's make it 21 to buy an AR! Can't make up their or your stupidity.
Lets just agree that the founders didn't just return from a deer hunt. They had just liberated a nation from a tyrannical government! They were only able to do so because the populace had arms and militias.
Most people don't know the shot heard around the world was due to an attempt by the Brits to disarm the colonists. They were marching to seize arms and powder stores.
We are free because of armed men who were brave enough to say "Enough" and "Never".
BidenBros say control me more daddy!
Well I did know that, and I've been to the scene.
Scalia treated "well-regulated militia" as having no effect whatsoever.
That's not proper interpretation of any written document.
What dies "well regulated" in the 2A.
Use your own words, Betty
It meant a citizen soldier militia that would avoid any necessity for a standing army. You might well be expected to defend the country; it wasn’t written to allow you to overthrow the government. It wasn’t about an individual right to own guns.
Scalia was a selective “originalist”.
It’s also to defend yourself and your natural rights if/when the government becomes tyrannical. Thomas Jefferson was the original originalist. You know this, you’re just being dishonest. Helen.
TJ is but one of the founders, Beatrice. Definitely not the only one to comment on the right to bear arms.
Pretty sure he is an originalist, Dorothy. More so than people you keep mentioning. So your argument is “other people said thing too”? Deep take, ma’am
Deeper than any take on Jefferson, who wasn’t even at the Constitutional Convention after all.
“A well regulated Militia, composed of gentlemen freeholders, and other freemen, is the natural strength and only stable security of a free Government.” -George Mason (emphasis mine)
Lets just agree that the founders didn't just return from a deer hunt. They had just liberated a nation from a tyrannical government! They were only able to do so because the populace had arms and militias.
Most people don't know the shot heard around the world was due to an attempt by the Brits to disarm the colonists. They were marching to seize arms and powder stores.
We are free because of armed men who were brave enough to say "Enough" and "Never".
BidenBros say control me more daddy!
Well I did know that, and I've been to the scene.
Scalia treated "well-regulated militia" as having no effect whatsoever.
That's not proper interpretation of any written document.
What dies "well regulated" in the 2A.
Use your own words, Betty
It meant a citizen soldier militia that would avoid any necessity for a standing army. You might well be expected to defend the country; it wasn’t written to allow you to overthrow the government. It wasn’t about an individual right to own guns.
Scalia was a selective “originalist”.
All I have to say is Fuck You!
So every Supreme court ruling was wrong but you're right?
The founders actual writings say you are a stupid POS. They say that's exactly what it's for. Maybe you missed the part about the British trying to seize arms and powder stores? That's why it says what it says dimwit. Good God your two dads wasted a lot of money on your schooling!
You really are this dumb!
We’ve already been through the shot heard round the world, lady. The founders were horrified at the idea of a standing army and preferred a militia of citizen soldiers.
Your suggestion that there is some long line of cases supporting your gundamentalist views demonstrates your ignorance, as if that was in doubt. Heller is the case in question. It was decided in 2008. It is not an exercise in originalism.
Why yes you really are this stupid! That law school diploma from a Cracker Jack box or the Close Cover Before Striking School of Law and Heavy Machinery?
You do realize one of the most liberal district courts in the country just ruled 18 year old's can buy any gun they want right? Struck down 21 YO bullshit. Yet the dems are all saying let's make it 21 to buy an AR! Can't make up their or your stupidity.
Lets just agree that the founders didn't just return from a deer hunt. They had just liberated a nation from a tyrannical government! They were only able to do so because the populace had arms and militias.
Most people don't know the shot heard around the world was due to an attempt by the Brits to disarm the colonists. They were marching to seize arms and powder stores.
We are free because of armed men who were brave enough to say "Enough" and "Never".
BidenBros say control me more daddy!
Well I did know that, and I've been to the scene.
Scalia treated "well-regulated militia" as having no effect whatsoever.
That's not proper interpretation of any written document.
What dies "well regulated" in the 2A.
Use your own words, Betty
It meant a citizen soldier militia that would avoid any necessity for a standing army. You might well be expected to defend the country; it wasn’t written to allow you to overthrow the government. It wasn’t about an individual right to own guns.
Scalia was a selective “originalist”.
It’s also to defend yourself and your natural rights if/when the government becomes tyrannical. Thomas Jefferson was the original originalist. You know this, you’re just being dishonest. Helen.
TJ is but one of the founders, Beatrice. Definitely not the only one to comment on the right to bear arms.
Pretty sure he is an originalist, Dorothy. More so than people you keep mentioning. So your argument is “other people said thing too”? Deep take, ma’am
Deeper than any take on Jefferson, who wasn’t even at the Constitutional Convention after all.
“A well regulated Militia, composed of gentlemen freeholders, and other freemen, is the natural strength and only stable security of a free Government.” -George Mason (emphasis mine)
I don’t think you understand what a free government means, Boris.
You’re a big fan of George Mason now? That’s cute.
Lets just agree that the founders didn't just return from a deer hunt. They had just liberated a nation from a tyrannical government! They were only able to do so because the populace had arms and militias.
Most people don't know the shot heard around the world was due to an attempt by the Brits to disarm the colonists. They were marching to seize arms and powder stores.
We are free because of armed men who were brave enough to say "Enough" and "Never".
BidenBros say control me more daddy!
Well I did know that, and I've been to the scene.
Scalia treated "well-regulated militia" as having no effect whatsoever.
That's not proper interpretation of any written document.
What dies "well regulated" in the 2A.
Use your own words, Betty
It meant a citizen soldier militia that would avoid any necessity for a standing army. You might well be expected to defend the country; it wasn’t written to allow you to overthrow the government. It wasn’t about an individual right to own guns.
Scalia was a selective “originalist”.
It’s also to defend yourself and your natural rights if/when the government becomes tyrannical. Thomas Jefferson was the original originalist. You know this, you’re just being dishonest. Helen.
TJ is but one of the founders, Beatrice. Definitely not the only one to comment on the right to bear arms.
Pretty sure he is an originalist, Dorothy. More so than people you keep mentioning. So your argument is “other people said thing too”? Deep take, ma’am
Deeper than any take on Jefferson, who wasn’t even at the Constitutional Convention after all.
“A well regulated Militia, composed of gentlemen freeholders, and other freemen, is the natural strength and only stable security of a free Government.” -George Mason (emphasis mine)
I don’t think you understand what a free government means, Boris.
You’re a big fan of George Mason now? That’s cute.
George Mason of the wouldn’t sign the Constitution Masons?
This in in the thread. Could never happen. The aid to Ukraine is closely monitored with clear segregation of duties to insure security, just like our blue city election processes. I mean who would leave $80 billion worth of US arms lying around in Afghanistan, who would provide billions in US arms to Libyan democratic freedom fighters that ended up with ISIS in Syria. Certainly not US democrats.
Lets just agree that the founders didn't just return from a deer hunt. They had just liberated a nation from a tyrannical government! They were only able to do so because the populace had arms and militias.
Most people don't know the shot heard around the world was due to an attempt by the Brits to disarm the colonists. They were marching to seize arms and powder stores.
We are free because of armed men who were brave enough to say "Enough" and "Never".
BidenBros say control me more daddy!
Well I did know that, and I've been to the scene.
Scalia treated "well-regulated militia" as having no effect whatsoever.
That's not proper interpretation of any written document.
What dies "well regulated" in the 2A.
Use your own words, Betty
It meant a citizen soldier militia that would avoid any necessity for a standing army. You might well be expected to defend the country; it wasn’t written to allow you to overthrow the government. It wasn’t about an individual right to own guns.
Scalia was a selective “originalist”.
Federalist 46 makes it absolutely clear you are wrong, as per usual. You should know something before you open your mouth Adolph. Ignorant sluts like you who spew mistruths as facts are why we have so many dumb lemmings in this country who bought the Covid myth.
From Madison, you know, the guy who chiefly wrote the BOR:
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.
You will of course try to make some tortured argument that yes, even though Madison is clearly arguing that a well armed citizenry can form a militia to defend itself against a larger centralized government, it somehow doesn't mean what the words clearly say it means because reasons. Then you will end it with Bertie or Sally or some other rapier wit quip. You are a simpleton.
Lets just agree that the founders didn't just return from a deer hunt. They had just liberated a nation from a tyrannical government! They were only able to do so because the populace had arms and militias.
Most people don't know the shot heard around the world was due to an attempt by the Brits to disarm the colonists. They were marching to seize arms and powder stores.
We are free because of armed men who were brave enough to say "Enough" and "Never".
BidenBros say control me more daddy!
Well I did know that, and I've been to the scene.
Scalia treated "well-regulated militia" as having no effect whatsoever.
That's not proper interpretation of any written document.
What dies "well regulated" in the 2A.
Use your own words, Betty
It meant a citizen soldier militia that would avoid any necessity for a standing army. You might well be expected to defend the country; it wasn’t written to allow you to overthrow the government. It wasn’t about an individual right to own guns.
Scalia was a selective “originalist”.
It’s also to defend yourself and your natural rights if/when the government becomes tyrannical. Thomas Jefferson was the original originalist. You know this, you’re just being dishonest. Helen.
TJ is but one of the founders, Beatrice. Definitely not the only one to comment on the right to bear arms.
Pretty sure he is an originalist, Dorothy. More so than people you keep mentioning. So your argument is “other people said thing too”? Deep take, ma’am
Deeper than any take on Jefferson, who wasn’t even at the Constitutional Convention after all.
“A well regulated Militia, composed of gentlemen freeholders, and other freemen, is the natural strength and only stable security of a free Government.” -George Mason (emphasis mine)
Lets just agree that the founders didn't just return from a deer hunt. They had just liberated a nation from a tyrannical government! They were only able to do so because the populace had arms and militias.
Most people don't know the shot heard around the world was due to an attempt by the Brits to disarm the colonists. They were marching to seize arms and powder stores.
We are free because of armed men who were brave enough to say "Enough" and "Never".
BidenBros say control me more daddy!
Well I did know that, and I've been to the scene.
Scalia treated "well-regulated militia" as having no effect whatsoever.
That's not proper interpretation of any written document.
What dies "well regulated" in the 2A.
Use your own words, Betty
It meant a citizen soldier militia that would avoid any necessity for a standing army. You might well be expected to defend the country; it wasn’t written to allow you to overthrow the government. It wasn’t about an individual right to own guns.
Scalia was a selective “originalist”.
It’s also to defend yourself and your natural rights if/when the government becomes tyrannical. Thomas Jefferson was the original originalist. You know this, you’re just being dishonest. Helen.
TJ is but one of the founders, Beatrice. Definitely not the only one to comment on the right to bear arms.
Pretty sure he is an originalist, Dorothy. More so than people you keep mentioning. So your argument is “other people said thing too”? Deep take, ma’am
Deeper than any take on Jefferson, who wasn’t even at the Constitutional Convention after all.
“A well regulated Militia, composed of gentlemen freeholders, and other freemen, is the natural strength and only stable security of a free Government.” -George Mason (emphasis mine)
I don’t think you understand what a free government means, Boris.
You’re a big fan of George Mason now? That’s cute.
George Mason of the wouldn’t sign the Constitution Masons?
Lets just agree that the founders didn't just return from a deer hunt. They had just liberated a nation from a tyrannical government! They were only able to do so because the populace had arms and militias.
Most people don't know the shot heard around the world was due to an attempt by the Brits to disarm the colonists. They were marching to seize arms and powder stores.
We are free because of armed men who were brave enough to say "Enough" and "Never".
BidenBros say control me more daddy!
Well I did know that, and I've been to the scene.
Scalia treated "well-regulated militia" as having no effect whatsoever.
That's not proper interpretation of any written document.
What dies "well regulated" in the 2A.
Use your own words, Betty
It meant a citizen soldier militia that would avoid any necessity for a standing army. You might well be expected to defend the country; it wasn’t written to allow you to overthrow the government. It wasn’t about an individual right to own guns.
Scalia was a selective “originalist”.
It’s also to defend yourself and your natural rights if/when the government becomes tyrannical. Thomas Jefferson was the original originalist. You know this, you’re just being dishonest. Helen.
TJ is but one of the founders, Beatrice. Definitely not the only one to comment on the right to bear arms.
Pretty sure he is an originalist, Dorothy. More so than people you keep mentioning. So your argument is “other people said thing too”? Deep take, ma’am
Deeper than any take on Jefferson, who wasn’t even at the Constitutional Convention after all.
“A well regulated Militia, composed of gentlemen freeholders, and other freemen, is the natural strength and only stable security of a free Government.” -George Mason (emphasis mine)
I don’t think you understand what a free government means, Boris.
You’re a big fan of George Mason now? That’s cute.
It’s any port in a storm when Dazzler is getting tossed about like a dingy in a Hurricane.
Lets just agree that the founders didn't just return from a deer hunt. They had just liberated a nation from a tyrannical government! They were only able to do so because the populace had arms and militias.
Most people don't know the shot heard around the world was due to an attempt by the Brits to disarm the colonists. They were marching to seize arms and powder stores.
We are free because of armed men who were brave enough to say "Enough" and "Never".
BidenBros say control me more daddy!
Well I did know that, and I've been to the scene.
Scalia treated "well-regulated militia" as having no effect whatsoever.
That's not proper interpretation of any written document.
What dies "well regulated" in the 2A.
Use your own words, Betty
It meant a citizen soldier militia that would avoid any necessity for a standing army. You might well be expected to defend the country; it wasn’t written to allow you to overthrow the government. It wasn’t about an individual right to own guns.
Scalia was a selective “originalist”.
It’s also to defend yourself and your natural rights if/when the government becomes tyrannical. Thomas Jefferson was the original originalist. You know this, you’re just being dishonest. Helen.
TJ is but one of the founders, Beatrice. Definitely not the only one to comment on the right to bear arms.
Pretty sure he is an originalist, Dorothy. More so than people you keep mentioning. So your argument is “other people said thing too”? Deep take, ma’am
Deeper than any take on Jefferson, who wasn’t even at the Constitutional Convention after all.
“A well regulated Militia, composed of gentlemen freeholders, and other freemen, is the natural strength and only stable security of a free Government.” -George Mason (emphasis mine)
I don’t think you understand what a free government means, Boris.
You’re a big fan of George Mason now? That’s cute.
It’s any port in a storm when Dazzler is getting tossed about like a dingy in a Hurricane.
Just take the L girls.
Knowing what was meant by the words used is fundamental to interpretation.
Changing the subject is only making you and the Austrian look dumber, if that's possible.
Lets just agree that the founders didn't just return from a deer hunt. They had just liberated a nation from a tyrannical government! They were only able to do so because the populace had arms and militias.
Most people don't know the shot heard around the world was due to an attempt by the Brits to disarm the colonists. They were marching to seize arms and powder stores.
We are free because of armed men who were brave enough to say "Enough" and "Never".
BidenBros say control me more daddy!
Well I did know that, and I've been to the scene.
Scalia treated "well-regulated militia" as having no effect whatsoever.
That's not proper interpretation of any written document.
What dies "well regulated" in the 2A.
Use your own words, Betty
It meant a citizen soldier militia that would avoid any necessity for a standing army. You might well be expected to defend the country; it wasn’t written to allow you to overthrow the government. It wasn’t about an individual right to own guns.
Scalia was a selective “originalist”.
It’s also to defend yourself and your natural rights if/when the government becomes tyrannical. Thomas Jefferson was the original originalist. You know this, you’re just being dishonest. Helen.
TJ is but one of the founders, Beatrice. Definitely not the only one to comment on the right to bear arms.
Pretty sure he is an originalist, Dorothy. More so than people you keep mentioning. So your argument is “other people said thing too”? Deep take, ma’am
Deeper than any take on Jefferson, who wasn’t even at the Constitutional Convention after all.
“A well regulated Militia, composed of gentlemen freeholders, and other freemen, is the natural strength and only stable security of a free Government.” -George Mason (emphasis mine)
I don’t think you understand what a free government means, Boris.
You’re a big fan of George Mason now? That’s cute.
It’s any port in a storm when Dazzler is getting tossed about like a dingy in a Hurricane.
Just take the L girls.
Knowing what was meant by the words used is fundamental to interpretation.
Changing the subject is only making you and the Austrian look dumber, if that's possible.
#ButJefferson!
@Swaye was right. Perfect prediction on Herr Dazzlers simpleton response.
Lets just agree that the founders didn't just return from a deer hunt. They had just liberated a nation from a tyrannical government! They were only able to do so because the populace had arms and militias.
Most people don't know the shot heard around the world was due to an attempt by the Brits to disarm the colonists. They were marching to seize arms and powder stores.
We are free because of armed men who were brave enough to say "Enough" and "Never".
BidenBros say control me more daddy!
Well I did know that, and I've been to the scene.
Scalia treated "well-regulated militia" as having no effect whatsoever.
That's not proper interpretation of any written document.
What dies "well regulated" in the 2A.
Use your own words, Betty
It meant a citizen soldier militia that would avoid any necessity for a standing army. You might well be expected to defend the country; it wasn’t written to allow you to overthrow the government. It wasn’t about an individual right to own guns.
Scalia was a selective “originalist”.
Federalist 46 makes it absolutely clear you are wrong, as per usual. You should know something before you open your mouth Adolph. Ignorant sluts like you who spew mistruths as facts are why we have so many dumb lemmings in this country who bought the Covid myth.
From Madison, you know, the guy who chiefly wrote the BOR:
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.
You will of course try to make some tortured argument that yes, even though Madison is clearly arguing that a well armed citizenry can form a militia to defend itself against a larger centralized government, it somehow doesn't mean what the words clearly say it means because reasons. Then you will end it with Bertie or Sally or some other rapier wit quip. You are a simpleton.
Federalist 46 doesn't contradict what I've said in the slightest. Federalist 29 makes it clear that the militia wasn't just some flowery prose for Scalia to disregard.
Lets just agree that the founders didn't just return from a deer hunt. They had just liberated a nation from a tyrannical government! They were only able to do so because the populace had arms and militias.
Most people don't know the shot heard around the world was due to an attempt by the Brits to disarm the colonists. They were marching to seize arms and powder stores.
We are free because of armed men who were brave enough to say "Enough" and "Never".
BidenBros say control me more daddy!
Well I did know that, and I've been to the scene.
Scalia treated "well-regulated militia" as having no effect whatsoever.
That's not proper interpretation of any written document.
What dies "well regulated" in the 2A.
Use your own words, Betty
It meant a citizen soldier militia that would avoid any necessity for a standing army. You might well be expected to defend the country; it wasn’t written to allow you to overthrow the government. It wasn’t about an individual right to own guns.
Scalia was a selective “originalist”.
Federalist 46 makes it absolutely clear you are wrong, as per usual. You should know something before you open your mouth Adolph. Ignorant sluts like you who spew mistruths as facts are why we have so many dumb lemmings in this country who bought the Covid myth.
From Madison, you know, the guy who chiefly wrote the BOR:
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.
You will of course try to make some tortured argument that yes, even though Madison is clearly arguing that a well armed citizenry can form a militia to defend itself against a larger centralized government, it somehow doesn't mean what the words clearly say it means because reasons. Then you will end it with Bertie or Sally or some other rapier wit quip. You are a simpleton.
Federalist 46 doesn't contradict what I've said in the slightest. Federalist 29 makes it clear that the militia wasn't just some flowery prose for Scalia to disregard.
Comments
So every Supreme court ruling was wrong but you're right?
The founders actual writings say you are a stupid POS. They say that's exactly what it's for. Maybe you missed the part about the British trying to seize arms and powder stores? That's why it says what it says dimwit. Good God your two dads wasted a lot of money on your schooling!
You really are this dumb!
Your suggestion that there is some long line of cases supporting your gundamentalist views demonstrates your ignorance, as if that was in doubt. Heller is the case in question. It was decided in 2008. It is not an exercise in originalism.
You do realize one of the most liberal district courts in the country just ruled 18 year old's can buy any gun they want right? Struck down 21 YO bullshit. Yet the dems are all saying let's make it 21 to buy an AR! Can't make up their or your stupidity.
“A well regulated Militia, composed of gentlemen freeholders, and other freemen, is the natural strength and only stable security of a free Government.”
-George Mason (emphasis mine)
You’re a big fan of George Mason now? That’s cute.
From Madison, you know, the guy who chiefly wrote the BOR:
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.
You will of course try to make some tortured argument that yes, even though Madison is clearly arguing that a well armed citizenry can form a militia to defend itself against a larger centralized government, it somehow doesn't mean what the words clearly say it means because reasons. Then you will end it with Bertie or Sally or some other rapier wit quip. You are a simpleton.
George Mason, who birthed the Bill of Rights.
Knowing what was meant by the words used is fundamental to interpretation.
Changing the subject is only making you and the Austrian look dumber, if that's possible.
#ButJefferson!
Federalist 46 doesn't contradict what I've said in the slightest. Federalist 29 makes it clear that the militia wasn't just some flowery prose for Scalia to disregard.
Ma'am.