Regulated doesn’t mean what they think it does in this context. These people are so far removed from historical accuracy they can’t even understand that regulated means the stock and supply of one’s arms and ammunition in this context.
Then don’t let democrat voters own guns. It’s clear your death cult is the overwhelming purveyor of shootings period.
We clearly need common sense leftist control. You can be a leftist, that's fine. You just have to live in a special camp with other leftists where your leftist bullshit won't harm anyone else.
Yeah, a regular was a member of a Line infantry company (as opposed to a cavalryman or a scout/irregular). That is the militia should have equipment parity with a regular soldier.
Today that consists of a select fire rifle, rifle rated plate carrier and helmet, red dot optics and night vision, rail attachments like IR laser, flashlights, and underbarrel grenade launchers, apcs, IFVs, Top attack ATGMS like the Javelin, and MANPADs. The average American is woefully underequipped.
I take heart in the examples of the Mujahideen and the Taliban who managed to rout two of the world's superpowers using AK 47s, IEDs, Toyota pickup trucks, and any of the more sophisticated weapons they could procure from the CIA or steal from the Army and Marines.
These people are so far removed from historical accuracy...
I heard some retard - and it was even a politician in a position of power - trying to claim that in the old days the government lent arms to the militias.
Bitch, the people lent the government things like warships.
The retarded midwit blithly parroting words that other people put in his head for them, ignorant of the notion that language evolves and changes, and statements from over two hundred years ago might have different meaning from what they think they mean.
And that's being nice. More than likely, this is just yet another boot-licker that hates you and wants you nice and helpless.
There really shouldn't be any debate about what the 2nd means. You've got quote after endless quote of politicians and thinkers from before, during, and after the fucking thing was written about what 'militia' means, which is basically everyone except politicians.
When you start looking into this stuff, you'll find statements that make some fedposts look positively benign in comparison. Those guys back then didn't fuck around.
Let's follow this one a bit and say people who aren't well-regulated shouldn't have guns. Well, trans people can't even regulate their own hormones, we'd better make sure none of them can get guns, right?
Given that background checks are supposed to bar severely mentally ill people, and they should have been in asylums, the law already should be preventing this if working properly.
I mean there are rules to any group to help encourage cohesion, but OBEYING them relies on how much confidence you have in the command structure and if you have information on the ground that makes those rules redundant.
Not to mention the point of militias if to protect your life and property from typically an external threat, not form an armed group and BECOME the threat like I see a lot of armed leftists groups do (a lot of friendly fire incidents in those groups)
I would love to see a "well regulated militia" per the standards of the Constitution come back. I'd get to know my neighbors better and we could bond during our shared military training.
I suspect, however, that the idiots who trot out their warped understanding of the 2d Amendment wouldn't like it at all though. You see, when the local town council or the state legislature passes another one of their typical garbage leftist laws taxing the shit out of us and handing it to trannies, druggies, and murder hobos their odds of regretting it go up exponentially when their constituents are already organized into armed military forces.
Really wouldn't matter, though, because it's not the right of the militia to bear arms. It's the right of the people.
Also - once again - it's not a right the government bestows on us. It's not some "privilege" the shitbag left can take away. It's a God given right, and the amendment is there placing a limit on the government, specifying - wisely - that it is not allowed to infringe on it.
The sad part is the NPC that regurgitated this legitimately thinks they're being clever by repeating this garbage.
Skipping over them not knowing what "well regulated" meant back then, because it's already been mentioned in this thread, how they think people were supposed to form a militia without being able to own arms? Do they think the founding fathers politely asked King George to lend them a few guns? The 2nd also doesn't say "the right of the militia to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed".
A small, but vital correction - well regulated meant "kept in good working order". When applied to the militia that can mean training and discipline, but it doesn't give them weasel words to demand training courses and oversight.
Regulated doesn’t mean what they think it does in this context. These people are so far removed from historical accuracy they can’t even understand that regulated means the stock and supply of one’s arms and ammunition in this context.
Then don’t let democrat voters own guns. It’s clear your death cult is the overwhelming purveyor of shootings period.
We clearly need common sense leftist control. You can be a leftist, that's fine. You just have to live in a special camp with other leftists where your leftist bullshit won't harm anyone else.
Yeah, a regular was a member of a Line infantry company (as opposed to a cavalryman or a scout/irregular). That is the militia should have equipment parity with a regular soldier.
Today that consists of a select fire rifle, rifle rated plate carrier and helmet, red dot optics and night vision, rail attachments like IR laser, flashlights, and underbarrel grenade launchers, apcs, IFVs, Top attack ATGMS like the Javelin, and MANPADs. The average American is woefully underequipped.
I take heart in the examples of the Mujahideen and the Taliban who managed to rout two of the world's superpowers using AK 47s, IEDs, Toyota pickup trucks, and any of the more sophisticated weapons they could procure from the CIA or steal from the Army and Marines.
Don't forget the mountains. Afghanistan's terrain is its most valuable defense asset.
I heard some retard - and it was even a politician in a position of power - trying to claim that in the old days the government lent arms to the militias.
Bitch, the people lent the government things like warships.
Marque
Marquis is a noble title, like a count or duke- it's of French origin, I think.
The Maquis were the French Resistance in World War II, and Star Trek used the name for the terrorist group that were fighting the Cardassians.
It's easy to get them confused, because they're all French words that are spelled similar.
According to the Marquess of Queensberry Rules if the US government can have aircraft carriers, I can have an aircraft carrier. It's the law.
The retarded midwit blithly parroting words that other people put in his head for them, ignorant of the notion that language evolves and changes, and statements from over two hundred years ago might have different meaning from what they think they mean.
And that's being nice. More than likely, this is just yet another boot-licker that hates you and wants you nice and helpless.
There really shouldn't be any debate about what the 2nd means. You've got quote after endless quote of politicians and thinkers from before, during, and after the fucking thing was written about what 'militia' means, which is basically everyone except politicians.
When you start looking into this stuff, you'll find statements that make some fedposts look positively benign in comparison. Those guys back then didn't fuck around.
Lol, okay.
Let's follow this one a bit and say people who aren't well-regulated shouldn't have guns. Well, trans people can't even regulate their own hormones, we'd better make sure none of them can get guns, right?
Given that background checks are supposed to bar severely mentally ill people, and they should have been in asylums, the law already should be preventing this if working properly.
Did these retards miss the various bombings of schools, hospitals, and weddings during the 2000s middle east conflicts?
Wordcel midwits who don't understand what words mean and getting really smug and hateful about it.
I own guns so I can kill authoritarians who try to put their boots on my neck.
Why would I give those authoritarians control over me and my guns?
I mean there are rules to any group to help encourage cohesion, but OBEYING them relies on how much confidence you have in the command structure and if you have information on the ground that makes those rules redundant.
Not to mention the point of militias if to protect your life and property from typically an external threat, not form an armed group and BECOME the threat like I see a lot of armed leftists groups do (a lot of friendly fire incidents in those groups)
I hope they make it illegal to shoot kids, that darn "gun free zone" loophole needs to be closed
I would love to see a "well regulated militia" per the standards of the Constitution come back. I'd get to know my neighbors better and we could bond during our shared military training.
I suspect, however, that the idiots who trot out their warped understanding of the 2d Amendment wouldn't like it at all though. You see, when the local town council or the state legislature passes another one of their typical garbage leftist laws taxing the shit out of us and handing it to trannies, druggies, and murder hobos their odds of regretting it go up exponentially when their constituents are already organized into armed military forces.
Actually it kinda does.
Really wouldn't matter, though, because it's not the right of the militia to bear arms. It's the right of the people.
Also - once again - it's not a right the government bestows on us. It's not some "privilege" the shitbag left can take away. It's a God given right, and the amendment is there placing a limit on the government, specifying - wisely - that it is not allowed to infringe on it.
The sad part is the NPC that regurgitated this legitimately thinks they're being clever by repeating this garbage.
Skipping over them not knowing what "well regulated" meant back then, because it's already been mentioned in this thread, how they think people were supposed to form a militia without being able to own arms? Do they think the founding fathers politely asked King George to lend them a few guns? The 2nd also doesn't say "the right of the militia to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed".
The fact that they weren't getting guns was in the declaration of independence.
A small, but vital correction - well regulated meant "kept in good working order". When applied to the militia that can mean training and discipline, but it doesn't give them weasel words to demand training courses and oversight.