Has The U.S Government Overstepped its Boundries on Anti-Gun

[Ifreann]

1787: No standing army. Hunting was the best way to put food on the table. Frontier.

2013: Most funded standing military in the world. Go to the supermarket. Militia ain't needed.

Yes, the average person should have at least a pistol to defend themselves, a shotgun to defend their family and a rifle to hunt. How in the world do you justify Joe Shmoe selling an AK-47 and RPG to John Doe, just so that Doe can show off his arsenal to John Smith?

Well, if Joe and John arent doing anything wrong, then whats the problem with owning an RPG or an AK?

Those things are remarkably dangerous and neither of them have demonstrated that they can and will take the appropriate precautions to protect themselves and those around them.

[Tyriece]

It is true that gun's do not kill people, how ever making it harder for the people that do kill people to have guns is good. Also there are some guns that are designed to kill people better which we do not need. But other then that i do not see how they have.

[Chernoslavia]

Incorrect. Private militias are legal, and regulated in all fifty states except Wyoming. And I am talking about the "state-sponsored" militia of Iowa. The fact that i'm a member of the unorganized one is irrelevant, given the law.

False. Only Congress can approve militias.

Article I Section 8 of the US Constitution:

Congress shall have the power to

...

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

Amendment X of the Bill of RIghts:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Huh? Congress has no authority over private militias. Your mistaking them for the Coast Guard.

[Divair]

Of course not.

[Occupied Deutschland]

False. Only Congress can approve militias.

Article I Section 8 of the US Constitution:


Amendment X of the Bill of RIghts:

Huh? Congress has no authority over private militias. Your mistaking them for the Coast Guard.

Well, Congress could theoretically use that clause to call forth private militias to federal service and then have authority over them in organizing them into the standing federal forces as long as the state they came from appointed officers for that unit.

[Qahadim]

And I posted a refutation that shows you're incorrect.

No it doesn't. In fact, it shows that Congress is actually against private militias.

Also, Supremacy Clause.

How does it show that?

Irrelevant. Congress is not the end all authority of the militia until they call them into service. Until that is done so they are under the control of the state governors and legislatures. The whole "security of a free state" isn't about complete control of the militia by the federal torment, but a limitation on their power over the state militias. Congress cannot pass a law that permanently disbands the militias of the several states. That would violate the very amendment we're discussing.

[Chernoslavia]

Well, if Joe and John arent doing anything wrong, then whats the problem with owning an RPG or an AK?

Those things are remarkably dangerous and neither of them have demonstrated that they can and will take the appropriate precautions to protect themselves and those around them.

Owning those requires extensive amount of paperwork, a background check, registration, a $200 fee, and months of waiting for BATF approval. If someone is willing to pass all these hoops just to own those weapons then why should they be barred from owning them?

[Qahadim]

That's one of the possibilities, yes. As a citizen I am obligated by duty to protect my fellow citizens from our own government, if it becomes necessary for me to do so. If a small sect of people rebel, i'm obligated to put it down. If we are invaded by a foreign power, the same thing.

Are you trying to get me to admit something?

No, no, no, not at all. I'm just trying to understand the militia motivation from someone who's NOT an Alex Jones nut.
Sorry if I offended I certainly didn't mean to.

No offense taken. I'm just clarifying cause people love to use the "gotcha" tactic in this discussion. S'all good. ^_^

[Death Metal]

No it doesn't. In fact, it shows that Congress is actually against private militias.

Also, Supremacy Clause.

How does it show that?

Irrelevant. Congress is not the end all authority of the militia until they call them into service. Until that is done so they are under the control of the state governors and legislatures. The whole "security of a free state" isn't about complete control of the militia by the federal torment, but a limitation on their power over the state militias. Congress cannot pass a law that permanently disbands the militias of the several states. That would violate the very amendment we're discussing.

I meant the Constitution, by way of SCOTUS against militia use.

And the only militias recognized by the Constitution (and therefore the 2nd Amendment) are the federal ones.

You're not in a real militia. You're in a glorified gun club. You want to be a soldier, join the army. If you want to pretend to be a soldier, go to a paintball field.

[Chernoslavia]

Huh? Congress has no authority over private militias. Your mistaking them for the Coast Guard.

Well, Congress could theoretically use that clause to call forth private militias to federal service and then have authority over them in organizing them into the standing federal forces as long as the state they came from appointed officers for that unit.

Well in that case yes, but im pretty sure that wont happen anytime soon, especially if militias in general wont accept any officers that stand against their views.

[Qahadim]

How does it show that?

Irrelevant. Congress is not the end all authority of the militia until they call them into service. Until that is done so they are under the control of the state governors and legislatures. The whole "security of a free state" isn't about complete control of the militia by the federal torment, but a limitation on their power over the state militias. Congress cannot pass a law that permanently disbands the militias of the several states. That would violate the very amendment we're discussing.

I meant the Constitution, by way of SCOTUS against militia use.

And the only militias recognized by the Constitution (and therefore the 2nd Amendment) are the federal ones.

You're not in a real militia. You're in a glorified gun club. You want to be a soldier, join the army. If you want to pretend to be a soldier, go to a paintball field.

What uses are those?

No it doesn't. Did you read the link I posted earlier?

Yes I am, whether you like that or not is moot. Under federal and state law I'm as much of a member of the militia as you are. (which you are, whether you want to be or not)

[Imperializt Russia]

Tell you what.

If a secret alliance of Russians and Cubans slip into the country by parachuting out of airplanes and starts terrorizing the US, THEN you can have a full-auto weapon.

If the Borg attack, then you can have any kind of weapon you want.

Until then, quite frankly, we don't really need minutemen, and in the highly unlikely event that you are needed for a militia, the state will happily provide you with a M16A2 or better yet an M4.

He probably wouldn't need a full-auto weapon even if Russians, Cubans, or the Borg attacked. The government could just call in the National Guard.

If the Russians did attack, government-issue weapons will become irrelevant real fast.
Because the Russians won't be stepping onto American shores.

The Iowa militia.

Not a real militia. Militias are state-sponsored.

In some cases.

Incorrect. Private militias are legal, and regulated in all fifty states except Wyoming. And I am talking about the "state-sponsored" militia of Iowa. The fact that i'm a member of the unorganized one is irrelevant, given the law.

False. Only Congress can approve militias.

Article I Section 8 of the US Constitution:

Congress shall have the power to

...

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

Amendment X of the Bill of RIghts:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Well surely if it is the responsibility of congress to arm a militia, then the rights of "the people" to keep and bear arms is surely referring to the populace at large to keep their own weapons as they see fit.

Or am I missing something here?

[Galloism]

How does it show that?

Irrelevant. Congress is not the end all authority of the militia until they call them into service. Until that is done so they are under the control of the state governors and legislatures. The whole "security of a free state" isn't about complete control of the militia by the federal torment, but a limitation on their power over the state militias. Congress cannot pass a law that permanently disbands the militias of the several states. That would violate the very amendment we're discussing.

I meant the Constitution, by way of SCOTUS against militia use.

And the only militias recognized by the Constitution (and therefore the 2nd Amendment) are the federal ones.

Which federal militias would those be?

Before you say "national guard", until called into service for the fed, they're under the command of the governor in the state in which they're organized.

Hence why it's "Arkansas National Guard", "Florida National Guard", etc.

[Collective America]

Anyone who opposes the ownership of firearms is an enemy of the proletariat. All these regulations are just a plot by the bourgeoisie to disarm the working class.

I think people should be even allowed to own anti-tank and anti-air weaponry as long as they are mentally stable. The liberal capitalist dogs think that big government will protect them but it will only put them in chains.

[Death Metal]

No it doesn't. Did you read the link I posted earlier?

I did. It's a glorified WebMD for law, but it clearly shows that private militias are not official in any sense.

And no, we are not militamen. There is no active US militia. The closest thing we have is the National Guard. I'm really glad we don't have a private militia around here. Frankly, the day one forms is the day I get the fuck out of town and go somewhere that's actually safe.

[Galloism]

Anyone who opposes the ownership of firearms is an enemy of the proletariat. All these regulations are just a plot by the bourgeoisie to disarm the working class.

I think people should be even allowed to own anti-tank and anti-air weaponry as long as they are mentally stable. The liberal capitalist dogs think that big government will protect them but it will only put them in chains.

A gun rights communist.

Interesting.

[Galloism]

No it doesn't. Did you read the link I posted earlier?

I did. It's a glorified WebMD for law, but it clearly shows that private militias are not official in any sense.

And no, we are not militamen. There is no active US militia. The closest thing we have is the National Guard. I'm really glad we don't have a private militia around here. Frankly, the day one forms is the day I get the fuck out of town and go somewhere that's actually safe.

The local militia down here is pretty nice. I'm not a member, but they frequently help the sheriffs office with air recon, search and rescue, underwater recovery, things like that.

All in all, I tacitly approve of them.

[Imperializt Russia]

Anyone who opposes the ownership of firearms is an enemy of the proletariat. All these regulations are just a plot by the bourgeoisie to disarm the working class.

I think people should be even allowed to own anti-tank and anti-air weaponry as long as they are mentally stable. The liberal capitalist dogs think that big government will protect them but it will only put them in chains.

A gun rights communist.

Interesting.

Personally, I'd have said peculiar.

[Qahadim]

No it doesn't. Did you read the link I posted earlier?

I did. It's a glorified WebMD for law, but it clearly shows that private militias are not official in any sense.

And no, we are not militamen. There is no active US militia. The closest thing we have is the National Guard. I'm really glad we don't have a private militia around here. Frankly, the day one forms is the day I get the fuck out of town and go somewhere that's actually safe.

Sorry? If codified in state law, and the fact that a private militia falls under the "unorganized" category makes them official in every sense.

Inactivity doesn't change what you and I are. Like I said in the previous post your dislike of this fact is a moot point.

[Galloism]

A gun rights communist.

Interesting.

Personally, I'd have said peculiar.

I'm a lot older than you.

"Peculiar" is a fairly high bar for me.

[Death Metal]

I did. It's a glorified WebMD for law, but it clearly shows that private militias are not official in any sense.

And no, we are not militamen. There is no active US militia. The closest thing we have is the National Guard. I'm really glad we don't have a private militia around here. Frankly, the day one forms is the day I get the fuck out of town and go somewhere that's actually safe.

The local militia down here is pretty nice. I'm not a member, but they frequently help the sheriffs office with air recon, search and rescue, underwater recovery, things like that.

All in all, I tacitly approve of them.

Well, my experience with them are all drunken bullies who openly threaten to beat up "commies and gays". One of which was actually harassing students outside of a school and threatening them "not to be queer or else". So fuck that shit.

[Death Metal]

Inactivity doesn't change what you and I are. Like I said in the previous post your dislike of this fact is a moot point.

Well when the "fact" is a complete and total fiction I guess it doesn't matter what I think of it at all.

[Occupied Deutschland]

...
And no, we are not militamen.

Yes actually. Yes we are. By US code. Assuming you're a male over 17 under 45.

There is no active US militia.

Yes there is. There are the National Guards (organized militia) and everyone else (unorganized).

The closest thing we have is the National Guard

The National Guard isn't close. That's what it is. State militia.

I'm really glad we don't have a private militia around here. Frankly, the day one forms is the day I get the fuck out of town and go somewhere that's actually safe.

[/quote]
What a wonderfully blind way of looking at private militias.

Edit: Tags

[Imperializt Russia]

Personally, I'd have said peculiar.

I'm a lot older than you.

"Peculiar" is a fairly high bar for me.

Communist supporting universal gun rights is pretty far up there tbh.

[Occupied Deutschland]

The local militia down here is pretty nice. I'm not a member, but they frequently help the sheriffs office with air recon, search and rescue, underwater recovery, things like that.

All in all, I tacitly approve of them.

Well, my experience with them are all drunken bullies who openly threaten to beat up "commies and gays". One of which was actually harassing students outside of a school and threatening them "not to be queer or else". So fuck that shit.

Ah yes, judging a group based on a limited interaction with minute fractions of that group. That has always been known to produce accurate and correct results.