Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4 Next
Robert Baer
Guest
Sat Jan 21, 2012 6:27 am
Attorney General Eric Holder does not believe the 2nd Amendment gives
individuals the right to bear arms.
Les Cargill
Guest
Sat Jan 21, 2012 6:41 am
Robert Baer wrote:
Quote:
Attorney General Eric Holder does not believe the 2nd Amendment gives
individuals the right to bear arms.
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_fE-F7VIvYfk/Sa_jW-KsVcI/AAAAAAAABGc/4lKQs3uDkGY/s400/family%2520guy%2520bear%2520arms.jpg
--
Les Cargill
miso
Guest
Sat Jan 21, 2012 6:59 am
On 1/20/2012 9:27 PM, Robert Baer wrote:
Quote:
Attorney General Eric Holder does not believe the 2nd Amendment gives
individuals the right to bear arms.
Well regulated militia
Well regulated militia
Well regulated militia
Well regulated militia
Capiche?
miso
Guest
Sat Jan 21, 2012 7:01 am
On 1/20/2012 9:41 PM, Les Cargill wrote:
Quote:
wanted was a standing army. Hence they wanted a well regulated militia.
The 2nd amendment grants the national guard the right to exist. It is
not an individual right.
Robert Baer
Guest
Sat Jan 21, 2012 9:25 am
miso wrote:
Quote:
On 1/20/2012 9:27 PM, Robert Baer wrote:
Attorney General Eric Holder does not believe the 2nd Amendment gives
individuals the right to bear arms.
Well regulated militia
Well regulated militia
Well regulated militia
Well regulated militia
Capiche?
Apparently he does not.
PeterD
Guest
Sat Jan 21, 2012 2:23 pm
On 1/21/2012 1:01 AM, miso wrote:
Quote:
And some people do not understand it is an individual right...
--
I'm never going to grow up.
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
Guest
Sat Jan 21, 2012 4:47 pm
On Fri, 20 Jan 2012 22:01:50 -0800, miso <miso_at_sushi.com> wrote:
Quote:
Some people don't understand logic.
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
Guest
Sat Jan 21, 2012 4:47 pm
On Fri, 20 Jan 2012 21:59:17 -0800, miso <miso_at_sushi.com> wrote:
Quote:
On 1/20/2012 9:27 PM, Robert Baer wrote:
Attorney General Eric Holder does not believe the 2nd Amendment gives
individuals the right to bear arms.
Well regulated militia
Well regulated militia
Well regulated militia
Well regulated militia
Capiche?
You certainly don't.
Fred Bloggs
Guest
Sat Jan 21, 2012 5:32 pm
On Jan 21, 12:27 am, Robert Baer <robertb...@localnet.com> wrote:
Quote:
Attorney General Eric Holder does not believe the 2nd Amendment gives
individuals the right to bear arms.
Makes no difference what he thinks. "In 2008 and 2010, the Supreme
Court issued two Second Amendment decisions. In District of Columbia
v. Heller (2008), the Court ruled that the Second Amendment protects
an individual's right to possess a firearm, unconnected to service in
a militia." This pretty much makes it a moot point until such time as
the Constituion is changed.
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
Guest
Sat Jan 21, 2012 5:51 pm
On Sat, 21 Jan 2012 07:32:13 -0800 (PST), Fred Bloggs
<bloggs.fredbloggs.fred_at_gmail.com> wrote:
Quote:
On Jan 21, 12:27 am, Robert Baer <robertb...@localnet.com> wrote:
Attorney General Eric Holder does not believe the 2nd Amendment gives
individuals the right to bear arms.
Makes no difference what he thinks. "In 2008 and 2010, the Supreme
Court issued two Second Amendment decisions. In District of Columbia
v. Heller (2008), the Court ruled that the Second Amendment protects
an individual's right to possess a firearm, unconnected to service in
a militia." This pretty much makes it a moot point until such time as
the Constituion is changed.
Unfortunately it does. It's rather inconvenient to have to run to the courts
every time the government runs roughshod over your rights.
Les Cargill
Guest
Sat Jan 21, 2012 6:20 pm
miso wrote:
Quote:
On 1/20/2012 9:27 PM, Robert Baer wrote:
Attorney General Eric Holder does not believe the 2nd Amendment gives
individuals the right to bear arms.
Well regulated militia
Well regulated militia
Well regulated militia
Well regulated militia
Capiche?
What are necessary or sufficient ( or both ) conditions?
Arms are necessary for militias; militias are not
necessary for there to be arms.
Heller makes it all moot.
--
Les Cargill
Paul Hovnanian P.E.
Guest
Sat Jan 21, 2012 6:44 pm
miso wrote:
Quote:
They didn't have a problem with a standing army. They reserved the right to
arm one to Congress. What they didn't want was thirteen (now fifty)
standing armies. So the states were allowed to organize militias, just not
arm them.
Now, how do you organize a militia (or local police force, sheriff's
department, etc.) if you can't arm them? You just hire private citizens who
have the right to arm themselves. And you promise the states that you won't
interfere with that right.
The national Guard is only one instance of a local militia. It is armed by
Congress. But the states are prohibited from assembling another 'militia'
and arming them themselves. That would be circumventing the Constitution
itself (not just the Bill of Rights). So if the states want their cops to
show up for work with guns, that has to be a right their citizens in
general posses, not one conditional on joining the local police force.
--
Paul Hovnanian mailto:Paul_at_Hovnanian.com
------------------------------------------------------------------
Programmers don't die, they just GOSUB without RETURN.
Jim Thompson
Guest
Sat Jan 21, 2012 7:09 pm
On Sat, 21 Jan 2012 09:44:16 -0800, "Paul Hovnanian P.E."
<paul_at_hovnanian.com> wrote:
Quote:
miso wrote:
On 1/20/2012 9:41 PM, Les Cargill wrote:
Robert Baer wrote:
Attorney General Eric Holder does not believe the 2nd Amendment gives
individuals the right to bear arms.
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_fE-F7VIvYfk/Sa_jW-KsVcI/AAAAAAAABGc/4lKQs3uDkGY/s400/family%2520guy%2520bear%2520arms.jpg
--
Les Cargill
Some people don't understand the founding fathers. The last thing they
wanted was a standing army. Hence they wanted a well regulated militia.
The 2nd amendment grants the national guard the right to exist. It is
not an individual right.
They didn't have a problem with a standing army. They reserved the right to
arm one to Congress. What they didn't want was thirteen (now fifty)
standing armies. So the states were allowed to organize militias, just not
arm them.
Now, how do you organize a militia (or local police force, sheriff's
department, etc.) if you can't arm them? You just hire private citizens who
have the right to arm themselves. And you promise the states that you won't
interfere with that right.
The national Guard is only one instance of a local militia. It is armed by
Congress. But the states are prohibited from assembling another 'militia'
and arming them themselves. That would be circumventing the Constitution
itself (not just the Bill of Rights). So if the states want their cops to
show up for work with guns, that has to be a right their citizens in
general posses, not one conditional on joining the local police force.
We do things our own way in Arizona...
http://tinyurl.com/6pnt5gc
...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at
http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |
I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.
miso
Guest
Sat Jan 21, 2012 10:24 pm
Quote:
They didn't have a problem with a standing army. They reserved the right to
arm one to Congress. What they didn't want was thirteen (now fifty)
standing armies. So the states were allowed to organize militias, just not
arm them.
Oh now you are going to make me quote Jefferson:
"There are instruments so dangerous to the rights of the nation and
which place them so totally at the mercy of their governors that those
governors, whether legislative or executive, should be restrained from
keeping such instruments on foot but in well-defined cases. Such an
instrument is a standing army.”
miso
Guest
Sat Jan 21, 2012 10:28 pm
On 1/21/2012 7:32 AM, Fred Bloggs wrote:
Quote:
On Jan 21, 12:27 am, Robert Baer<robertb...@localnet.com> wrote:
Attorney General Eric Holder does not believe the 2nd Amendment gives
individuals the right to bear arms.
Makes no difference what he thinks. "In 2008 and 2010, the Supreme
Court issued two Second Amendment decisions. In District of Columbia
v. Heller (2008), the Court ruled that the Second Amendment protects
an individual's right to possess a firearm, unconnected to service in
a militia." This pretty much makes it a moot point until such time as
the Constituion is changed.
Actually the need is to change this activist court dominated by 5 far
right extremists that constantly change settled law. Hopefully in the
2nd Obama term we can replace one of those wingnuts and restore sanity.
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4 Next
