"Armed citizenry" would have been more appropriate. In that time the militia was the armed citizenry; hence the right to keep and bear arms. The king was not going to give up his colonies in the new world easily.
One big class action lawsuit coming up:
- Thread starter deonb
- Start date
"Armed citizenry" would have been more appropriate. In that time the militia was the armed citizenry; hence the right to keep and bear arms. The king was not going to give up his colonies in the new world easily.
![brian]](/community/data/avatars/m/21/21096.jpg?1456258959){kind=avatar}
brian]
Cleared for Takeoff
Hence the reason the conservatives want to stack the court with like minded individuals. The 2A isn't a slam dunk meaning we are guaranteed to have a gun in the home. The amendment is not clear and it is the interpretation of the court that is what the NRA and others are fighting for.
Not "protecting my 2 A rights" is basically a rallying cry right now.
hindsight2020
Final Approach
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2010
- Messages
- 6,724
- Display Name
Display name:
hindsight2020
Who this enemy is you guys keep talking about. Is it LEO? The DOD?
mkosmo
Pattern Altitude
Sure we do. We need those things, so we seek them. Others do, too, so they try to seek them. We wind up wanting the same thing. To protect what we need, we defend it. To defend it, we need a way to fight. While we could use our fists, fists, rocks, and firearms aren't a far cry from each other.
Half Fast
Touchdown! Greaser!
Actually, I think in Heller the USSC said that the right to keep a gun in the home is guaranteed by the 2A. That's now settled case law. It will take a while to trickle down to lower courts; some have ruled in contradiction to Heller and appeals are working their way up. In McDonald vs Chicago the 2A was held to apply to the states, not just the federal government.
If you haven't already done so, go read the Heller decision.
mkosmo
Pattern Altitude
Per federal law, all able bodied males, 18-45 are a member of the irregular militia. Apply that logic to bound firearm ownership and the "male" and age requirements both disappear for discrimination... then we're all a member of a militia anyhow.
Like we should be, anyhow.
denverpilot
Tied Down
The new story that he thought he was going to fight his way out and go to Lolapalooza next, is even more suspect. There’s so much misinformation around this dude, it’s incredible. A couple of weeks into most of these and we have a full profile showing they’re a loon, and we still don’t have that with this guy. Someone is REALLY embarrassed by something they know about this guy.
Imagine that. I know people who say they “need” airplanes when they live an hour from a giant international airport with multiple legacy carriers.
This. So this. Our cops here get issued about as much ammunition per YEAR for training as most AMATEUR completion shooters fire in a month of training. And yet their training EMPHASIZES pulling the pistol. No serious self defense training emphasizes drawing as the first option, ever.
Those states worry me when traveling because breakdowns happen. The responsible thing to do is keep the firearm on you and completely under your personal control at all times and well and truly concealed. And yet, that responsible behavior triggers a risk of a very lengthy jail sentence in certain (stupid) places.
I got a kick out of a locksmith and lock expert who posts a little about his firearms ownership on the east coast. He places the arms in the cheapest crap “safes” he can find when traveling - a safe he could open without picking it with a bobby pin or paper clip. He always has a paperclip and lock-picking tools in his wallet anyway for his job so he’s essentially making sure the silly “locked in a case” laws have nearly zero real impact on him. Some states have an additional “in a place inaccessible to the driver” but as he jokes... “And where is that in an SUV?”
There isn’t a fiscally Conservative party/cult. So I’m also not really represented by a single one of “my” politicians.
A few will lie and say they are but never miss an opportunity to spend, so it’s just lies.
All governments detest the thought that anyone could get by without them. Or would dare say so with arms.[/QUOTE]
A read of the other writings of all of the people who created the document makes the intention quite clear.
And legislation from the bench is popular because politicians don’t have to take direct responsibility for it. They can distance themselves from having to actually take a stand.
Depends on what they do and who they answer to. There’s all sorts of stories of government workers doing purely evil things from all departments. Nobody knows when they’ll be forced to interact with one of them. Badges and uniforms don’t impart any particularly better morality on the wearer. My former county Sheriff was locked up for life in the new jail they built and put his name on, because he was so “beloved”. He was secretly a real sick SOB.
brian]
Cleared for Takeoff
Well, the conversation was good until the LEO comments. There are bad ones- they are humans and (in my opinion) under paid. I get to meet a lot of the LEOs areound here. The problems they deal with almost daily are not the ones you want to hear about.
Brian,
Not trying to start an argument but, if I may ask, what parts of the constitution do you disagree with? Please bear in mid the Constitution and Bill Of Rights , the first ten amendments were written in an era when the King of England was adamant he was in control of the colonies while our forefathers/founders had respect for natural rights such as self defense and the determination of a new country to determine their fate.
Every president has the right to appoint Supreme Court Justices and the result will vary depending who is in office at the time. There will always be a mix of liberals and conservatives on the court, and that is the way it should be. It's the same 'checks and balances' all other administrations should be subject to.
The Constitution Of The United States is not a 'living document' but is one chiseled in stone. It can only be amended by a two thirds vote of the states. Please learn to live with that.
Cooter
Ejection Handle Pulled
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2015
- Messages
- 2,412
- Display Name
Display name:
Cooter
We're reached a point of agreement.
Nate,
Given that he had such a low profile I think it will take some time for the feds to reach a conclusion. It is going to take time to research him and discover his motives.
James331
Ejection Handle Pulled
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2014
- Messages
- 20,309
- Display Name
Display name:
James331
yes and no
Its anyone who would act as a tyrant to try to stomp on the rights of the American people, its not a linear thing, I don't think people go from happy unicorns and puppies to slaughtering their own people overnight, and the 2A is a check to keep those things from occurring in the first place
Matthew
Touchdown! Greaser!
In southern KC area we have a paved trail system that extends for many miles. Bikes, joggers, and walkers use it a lot. The trail generally follows streams ("The Streamway Trail") and can be quite remote in areas. Assaults happen. A guy was just arrested for at least 5 murders, all victims shot in the back, all random. A week ago some guy grabbed a woman who's a kickboxing instructor - he'll be walking funny for a while.
http://fox4kc.com/2017/09/27/woman-fights-off-attacker-on-indian-creek-trail/
Situational awareness is the first level of defense.
denverpilot
Tied Down
What was said that was distressing? There’s LEO who shouldn’t have the job just like there’s people who shouldn’t be in every job. Difference is the “thin blue line” mentality, and I’ve worked for a Sheriff before so I’ve seen it. I told “good” LEO friends a crap storm was coming from their inability to get rid of certain people (in my case very specific people by first name) because of their rank-closing habits. I was right.
One Denver cop has cost the city over $3.5M in payouts to avoid letting anything he’s done go to court and become fully public. Not including defense costs paid by the taxpayers. I know I wouldn’t have my job if I had multiple incidents of violent behavior that cost my employer millions.
What’s the problem with admitting some LEO are complete ass-hats and the system can’t seem to get rid of them? All their co-workers have to do to avoid that is make sure they get rid of them, whatever it takes to make that happen.
Perhaps. Don’t know. Don’t care really. Psychotic pretty much covers it for me. If there’s anything more sinister, it’ll come out so many years later, nobody will care. If there’s been major mistakes made by a government entity they’ll make sure to release that information on a Friday before a holiday weekend. Normal. PAO SOP.
We aren’t allowed to get the really important information: His Medical record. Privacy for dead psychotics is a thing in our society, for some reason. I’m cool with stripping all medical privacy rights of any mass murderer immediately, dead or alive. I see no benefit to society from maintaining a mass murderer’s personal privacy. Would love to see all of their prescription drug lists. I think there’s likely some very eye opening things to see there. Pharma will never allow that.
Rushie
En-Route
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2006
- Messages
- 3,017
- Display Name
Display name:
Rushie
That book I mentioned ("Let's Get Free: A Hip-Hop Theory of Justice" by Paul Butler), makes clear that cops are maneuvered into what they do by the system. They get rewarded for numbers of arrests. They must enforce insane drug laws, and traffic laws designed to bring in revenue, not for safety; they are encouraged to rely on citizen informants over real evidence. They are encouraged to lie to suspects, to entrap, to profile, to divert confiscated evidence, give it to informants in exchange for information and so on. As long as courts continue to convict such a large portion of non-violent offenders, and laws are so prolific none of us can get through a day without breaking one of them, the police will be expected to continue supplying the suspects.
The problem isn't that police are bad, not at all. I believe most of them truly want to help the community. But they are as caught up in what's becoming more and more an intrusion of law into citizens' everyday lives as all the rest of us. And as you say, they are human. They contain the same spectrum of good to evil as any other profession.
Skyrys62
En-Route
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2017
- Messages
- 3,727
- Location
- hopefully not at work
- Display Name
Display name:
Meet the Fokkers
DFH65
En-Route
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2013
- Messages
- 2,609
- Display Name
Display name:
DFH65
Who is the enemy? There are very few people that are truly anti-gun the issue really is who they want to have the guns? Do we want guns only in the hands of the government? Or do you want them in the hands of the people too. I am not willing to bank on our government always doing what is right.
brian]
Cleared for Takeoff
Oh Lordy - so many directions and I'm the dissenting voice. (Ok, partially as I'm also a gun owner. I just not a very good follower any more.)
I agree with @DFH65 that few people really want to ban guns - but I'll add many use the topic to gain power by promising to give or take "gun rights".
Taking the words of the constitution (and normally the average media/person's understanding) ignores how our government actually works. You have to include so much more - including the interpretation made by the Supreme Court. As @HalfFast noted, even the Heller decision helped and confused things at the same time. (Here is where things go a little over my head, but essentially the government can still regulate guns. Could go to the extreme to only allow a muzzle loader - to satisfy the "what was available then". Or I might get to buy the M60 with tracer rounds. Either way, any new law will got to the supreme court for a decision.)
My only point on the LEO conversation is, well, bad taste. And I don't get the "there going to get me" feeling of some. I guess I've met too many "LEOs" that they are not some mysterious three letter term, but actual people. I'll only offer what I've told others in person: most of the time your vote for president is far less important than your vote for the local officials: especially the sheriff, prosecutor and judge.
I agree with @DFH65 that few people really want to ban guns - but I'll add many use the topic to gain power by promising to give or take "gun rights".
Taking the words of the constitution (and normally the average media/person's understanding) ignores how our government actually works. You have to include so much more - including the interpretation made by the Supreme Court. As @HalfFast noted, even the Heller decision helped and confused things at the same time. (Here is where things go a little over my head, but essentially the government can still regulate guns. Could go to the extreme to only allow a muzzle loader - to satisfy the "what was available then". Or I might get to buy the M60 with tracer rounds. Either way, any new law will got to the supreme court for a decision.)
My only point on the LEO conversation is, well, bad taste. And I don't get the "there going to get me" feeling of some. I guess I've met too many "LEOs" that they are not some mysterious three letter term, but actual people. I'll only offer what I've told others in person: most of the time your vote for president is far less important than your vote for the local officials: especially the sheriff, prosecutor and judge.
azblackbird
Pattern Altitude
I'm game for a muzzle loader as long as the powers that be go back to a quill and ink.
hindsight2020
Final Approach
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2010
- Messages
- 6,724
- Display Name
Display name:
hindsight2020
I'm game for a muzzle loader as long as the powers that be go back to a quill and ink.
Again I ask, who are the powers that be? LEO? DOD?
denverpilot
Tied Down
Nobody here said they’re out to get anyone.
Someone asked if they’d be “the enemy” in a discussion of revolution, which they almost certainly would be, historically. Very rare for police forces to side with rebels, once a government goes out of control for whatever reasons.
And a discussion about their near immunity to personal liability and being fired for misbehavior already today, hopefully quite a long time away from any need for revolution.
Need to reign that in. You don’t want a police force where there’s no personal consequences. That’s how you get, “I was just doing my job/ordered to do it” and “we investigated ourselves and found ourselves not guilty”.
azblackbird
Pattern Altitude
Those who write the dumbass laws. LEO's are just the enforcers. The cool part about living here in AZ is that the majority of LEO's are avid 2A supporters and would fight right along with us to keep those rights.
azblackbird
Pattern Altitude
Here's a funny story. During the Obama era there were a few scares where we thought our 2A rights were under attack. A few times a year a bunch of us "gunnies" would get together and have a 2A Rally at our state capital. Usually a couple thousand people would show up along with a few senators, congressmen, mayors, sheriffs, etc. who would give their speeches and let everybody know where they stood on the 2A. So here we have all these people running around carry loaded guns on them, and mixing it up and BSing with all these government officials. Anybody here care to guess how many "on duty" cops there were at each of our events overseeing the crowd? I'll give you hint. It's more than one and less than three. Anybody care to guess how much trash was left on the ground from these events. How about ZERO! Not even a gum wrapper or a cigarette butt!
Gotta love the great state of Arizona!
Gotta love the great state of Arizona!
Last edited:
DFH65
En-Route
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2013
- Messages
- 2,609
- Display Name
Display name:
DFH65
I do find it interesting that whenever someone makes an argument for banning machine guns, high capacity magazines, bump fire stocks or whatever they always say they need to be banned because the can rain death upon large groups of people. Yet they always and I mean always put an exemption for these things in the new laws for law enforcement. So does that mean law enforcement needs the capability to rain death upon large groups of people?
I know a lot of law enforcement people most are great and definitely have the right temperament for the job but there are others who should never be in that job they are definitely the "just following orders" and "you will submit to my authority" types regardless of the law.
I know a lot of law enforcement people most are great and definitely have the right temperament for the job but there are others who should never be in that job they are definitely the "just following orders" and "you will submit to my authority" types regardless of the law.
Fearless Tower
Touchdown! Greaser!
If there is a class action lawsuit coming out of this, my money is on it involving a pharmaceutical company, not firearms manufacturer.
Half Fast
Touchdown! Greaser!
Fearless Tower
Touchdown! Greaser!
Not likely. Class action needs a deep pocket. Drug companies are much juicier targets than a lone doc with an insurance policy.
And, depending on the drug, there may be some connections to other shootings.
If it turns out the dude was taking Cymbalta, like some have theorized....holy ****.
Dav8or
Final Approach
So, if a person was prescribed this sort of drug, would you put them on a government watchlist and prohibit them from buying firearms, ammunition and stupid things like bump stocks?
azblackbird
Pattern Altitude
Even the most ardent of anti-gunners wouldn't even consider that. Psycho drugs are sacred cows to those guys. No way would they ever approve of putting themselves on a watchlist.
Lindberg
Final Approach
He can have the bullets. And anyone who would rather be a victim than touch a gun can make that choice. That's the beauty of freedom.
denverpilot
Tied Down
Pilots all fly those dangerous little machines, they must be suicidal! Put all the pilots on a watchlist! LOL.
If they took from the FAA playbook, you’d need a special government approved doctor and $10,000 to pay a special psychiatrist to “prove” to them that your psychiatrist did their job...
You know, the federally regulated first psychiatrist? LOL...
Upon review of yet another federally paid psychiatrist at HQ, of course. Hahaha.
If Psychiatrist #2 has Psychiatrist #1 write just the exact right words in a letter to Psychiatrist #3, the whole process goes easier.
Yeah. Um. Maybe not the best example of a system to use, perhaps...
Never mind.
If they took from the FAA playbook, you’d need a special government approved doctor and $10,000 to pay a special psychiatrist to “prove” to them that your psychiatrist did their job...
You know, the federally regulated first psychiatrist? LOL...
Upon review of yet another federally paid psychiatrist at HQ, of course. Hahaha.
If Psychiatrist #2 has Psychiatrist #1 write just the exact right words in a letter to Psychiatrist #3, the whole process goes easier.
Yeah. Um. Maybe not the best example of a system to use, perhaps...
Never mind.
Lindberg
Final Approach
And BTW, the bump-stock manufacturer has statutory immunity. It doesn't mean there won't be a lawsuit--plenty of scumbag lawyers out there--but it's very unlikely to be successful.
mtuomi
En-Route
The company holding the patent is tiny, no lawyer will go after them.
Dr. O
Pattern Altitude
Endless argument
The Founders understood (from bitter experience) that the very first thing that tyrants and dictators do is TAKE the guns
Let me think now, which party with their important people, is demanding I give up my gun? hmmmm
And the interesting thing is that most of these important people demanding my gun have armed people guarding them
Yes, crazy and violent people should not have guns
The other issue to think about is that there has never been a mass murderer/shooter/bomber that everyone who knew him said (afterwards) 'we always knew he would do something crazy someday'
Yes, every single one was already known to be strange/hostile/explosive, yadda yadda
As a society we knew he was a powder keg and we stood around and let him do it
Does that suggest anything
The Founders understood (from bitter experience) that the very first thing that tyrants and dictators do is TAKE the guns
Let me think now, which party with their important people, is demanding I give up my gun? hmmmm
And the interesting thing is that most of these important people demanding my gun have armed people guarding them
Yes, crazy and violent people should not have guns
The other issue to think about is that there has never been a mass murderer/shooter/bomber that everyone who knew him said (afterwards) 'we always knew he would do something crazy someday'
Yes, every single one was already known to be strange/hostile/explosive, yadda yadda
As a society we knew he was a powder keg and we stood around and let him do it
Does that suggest anything
FastEddieB
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2013
- Messages
- 11,420
- Location
- Lenoir City, TN/Mineral Bluff, GA
- Display Name
Display name:
Fast Eddie B
If you like podcasts:
Opening Arguments is a good one. The hosts are definitely left-leaning, but generally knowledgeable and thoughtful.
I mention this because they took a “deep dive” into the Second Amendment in two parts:
http://openargs.com/oa21-second-amendment-masterclass-part-1
http://openargs.com/oa26-second-amendment-masterclass-part-2
Agree or disagree, they provide a lot of background to the debate.
edited to add: not sure why my links are not posting properly. Anyway, easy to find via Google.
Opening Arguments is a good one. The hosts are definitely left-leaning, but generally knowledgeable and thoughtful.
I mention this because they took a “deep dive” into the Second Amendment in two parts:
http://openargs.com/oa21-second-amendment-masterclass-part-1
http://openargs.com/oa26-second-amendment-masterclass-part-2
Agree or disagree, they provide a lot of background to the debate.
edited to add: not sure why my links are not posting properly. Anyway, easy to find via Google.
Dav8or
Final Approach
And what do you suggest society do about these strange, hostile people? How do define strange and hostile and how would that apply identifying to the Las Vegas shooter? What should society have done about him prior to the shooting? If the Las Vegas shooter lived next door to you, what would you have done?
deonb
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2015
- Messages
- 2,266
- Display Name
Display name:
deonb
I give up.Which party would that be?
f you need to ask that question you have been sleeping in the closet far too long.
Cooter
Ejection Handle Pulled
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2015
- Messages
- 2,412
- Display Name
Display name:
Cooter
I forgot who it was who didn't want a loaded gun in the home. But here is a good reason for having one ready to go.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/police-16-old-boy-killed-185339413.html?.tsrc=daily_mail&uh_test=2_05
I've personally known of several cases that were similar. The people weren't ready and paid for it. In one instance a girl was raped across the hall from me. She had a husky to protect her but it was in its cage. It happened so fast, she didn't get a chance to open the cage.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/police-16-old-boy-killed-185339413.html?.tsrc=daily_mail&uh_test=2_05
I've personally known of several cases that were similar. The people weren't ready and paid for it. In one instance a girl was raped across the hall from me. She had a husky to protect her but it was in its cage. It happened so fast, she didn't get a chance to open the cage.
brian]
Cleared for Takeoff
I would not assume members of "that party" are anti gun. The "Dems" around here will point their shotgun as quickly as the "Repubs" if you trespass on their land. Could be just this part of the country....