When Obama came to visit...

[Pio1980]

Originally Posted by BigElCat

So our right to own guns is contingent on us being in a militia?

We have to be in a militia to own a gun. I'm glad that question is not on the FBI background check.

No, the Constitution only supports the "right" to keep and bear arms for support of a "well-ordered" State militia as written.
Otherwise, the Constitution leaves regulation of ownership and use to the states, except for the exceptions of continuous firing automatic firearms and muzzle suppressors for firearms regulated by the ATF Dept.
Otherwise,
You can own and use anything your state permits, used as allowed by state, county, and city ordinances.

[Pio1980]

Curiously "originalist strict constructionists" play fast and loose with their interpretations of the meaning of the second, and add all sorts of "rights" that are plainly not part of the brief wording, one assumes, by summoning the FFs intentions via a seance only they are privy. Intentions unenumerated aren't necessarily "Constitutional" outside of reasonable connection to the text. For instance there is no Constitutional "right" to armed insurrection against Federal authority under the 2nd by any reasonable reading of the text.

[donquixote99]

The 2nd is the 'militia to be safe from federal action' amendment. It's main purpose was to make the federal equivalent of the redcoat's march from Boston to Concord to seize a militia stockpile illegal.

The framers well-remembered how much they hated having all those redcoats around, and their idea was not to have a federal standing army, but have militias instead. There is a provision in the Constitution that says no appropriation for an army can persist more than two years. This means that there's always an election for the House of Representatives before a second such appropriation can be made. They figured this would assure that if a House voted for the ruinous cost of a standing army in peacetime, the people would vote them out.

The funding limitation mechanism the framers set-up worked a lot like they expected, until after WWII. The militias, not so much. In any case, the oddly-worded 2nd was written so that it would get votes both from the 'let every man be armed' believers, and the 'well-regulated militia' believers. And it therefore means whatever you want, though what actually matters is what current courts are willing to say it means.

[Pio1980]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

The 2nd is the 'militia to be safe from federal action' amendment. It's main purpose was to make the federal equivalent of the redcoat's march from Boston to Concord to seize a militia stockpile illegal.

The framers well-remembered how much they hated having all those redcoats around, and their idea was not to have a federal standing army, but have militias instead. There is a provision in the Constitution that says no appropriation for an army can persist more than two years. This means that there's always an election for the House of Representatives before a second such appropriation can be made. They figured this would assure that if a House voted for the ruinous cost of a standing army in peacetime, the people would vote them out.

The funding limitation mechanism the framers set-up worked a lot like they expected, until after WWII. The militias, not so much. In any case, the oddly-worded 2nd was written so that it would get votes both from the 'let every man be armed' believers, and the 'well-regulated militia' believers. And it therefore means whatever you want, though what actually matters is what current courts are willing to say it means.

Funny how that worked out in practice. The second is pretty much an irrelevant relic of a time long past under that read.
Re the "States Rights" argument that frequently arises, there was of course an armed rebellion based on slavery as a state right that didn't end in favor of supporting it. Nonetheless, state supported authoritarian oppression continued. Was that an acceptable alternative to Federal authority? For many, not so much.

[donquixote99]

The broad tendency has been for the Federal Government to be more liberal and less corrupt than the run of state governments. With exceptions noted. Likewise militias have gotten up to more mischief than the U.S. Army, Again, with exceptions noted.

The idea of 'constitutional right of insurrection' is a flagrant oxymoron. The resort to violent coercion is always the antithesis of 'rights.'

[Pio1980]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

The broad tendency has been for the Federal Government to be more liberal and less corrupt than the run of state governments. With exceptions noted. Likewise militias have gotten up to more mischief than the U.S. Army, Again, with exceptions noted.

The idea of 'constitutional right of insurrection' is a flagrant oxymoron. The resort to violent coercion is always the antithesis of 'rights.'

Not to the self-entitled "patriots" of selective authoritarianism.

[BigElCat]

I told Pio about the beat down the FBI gave my old man in 1971.

It's a long story. But my dad was known to the FBI.

In the mid-1970's, our next door neighbor (who lived about one mile away) invited my dad to join The Posse Comitatus. It was a regional militia, they called it The Posse. It was very discrete. Don't know much about it. My dad declined but was worried he might face some harassment from them. Dad told me "The Posse was just a bunch of red neck thugs who want to be the new KKK." If they threaten him, I didn't hear about it. In

Anyhow, the FBI came back to see him in about '77 or '78. They were asking about The Posse. My dad told me that he told them, "We hear rumors about The Posse, but I don't know anything about it".

In 1988 I had an M1 carbine and shit. My friends would come out blasting on our farm. The Posse neighbor did not like that at all. One time he blocked the road in front of me. Now his grandson lives with him. The boy don't like me, he watched me the last I went shooting about 2 years ago.

Skip forward to 1995.

LaVeigh and McNichols (unrelated to The Posse AFAIK) built that bomb they used in the OKC bombing. Built it about 30 miles north of our house. They had stored some of the fertilizer in my home town of Council Grove, Kansas. You should have seen all the helicopters, and police SUVs swarming around.

[BigElCat]

James Madison penned the 2nd amendment.

He was a slave owner, so he not referring to a 'free state' in that context.

Just wanted to say I was wrong regarding my previous interpretation.

[BigElCat]

Originally Posted by BigElCat

James Madison penned the 2nd amendment.

He was a slave owner, so he not referring to a 'free state' in that context.

Just wanted to say I was wrong regarding my previous interpretation.

Just figured out what Madison (the slave owner) meant when he said "free state". He was bragging about the newly won independence of the States from the Crown of England.

It was written in 1791.

Doh ! It takes me a while.

[BigElCat]

I forgot to mention that I like Obama, voted for him twice even though he's an arrogant MF'er.

Profiled me to a 'T'.

"Cling to their guns and their religion".

He's smarter than me, but his health care plan came straight from his Rothschild reign holders. O'bama Care. Pfft.

We're going to see nationalized health care five years from now, if we're still alive.