|
|
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 34,312 Likes: 10
Campfire 'Bwana
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 34,312 Likes: 10 |
"you want to work against the government, you need an F-16. You need something else than just an AR-15"
That's why they don't want us to have F-16's either. And if an AR-15 is so ineffective, why do Brandon and Co. want so desperately to take them from us? They do see them as a threat. But the main reason is because they believe they can scare the public into majority support for banning them. Then they move to semi-auto handguns. Then tubular magazine rifles. Then revolvers. Etc, etc.... Too much work, take too long. This is just "preparing" us for what is about to come down the pike during Biden's second term when they make a Major Change in the make up of the Supreme Court. At lease (3) justices will be gone before 2028, Thomas, Alito, Roberts and possibly Kavanagh. Then you can kiss both the Second and the First Good By. Fourth and Fifth, too. LEO have schit canned the Fourth long ago. People are just to naïve to know that their 4th Amendment rights have vanished.
Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Give a man a welfare check, a forty ounce malt liquor, a crack pipe, an Obama phone, free health insurance. and some Air Jordan's and he votes Democrat for a lifetime.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 6,860 Likes: 2
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 6,860 Likes: 2 |
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" - I believe one could make the argument that the word Militia is an informal army of the people (not federal) and the term "militia" would suggest that the people making up the militia would have access to the same quality of "small arms" as the formal government army. Certainly in the late 1770s, when the bill of right was drafted, the militia and formal continental army had access to the same weaponry. A militia musters with their own personal arms, while an army is issued arms by the government. Ok, but is there any reason to think they may be different in quality?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,971 Likes: 9
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,971 Likes: 9 |
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" - I believe one could make the argument that the word Militia is an informal army of the people (not federal) and the term "militia" would suggest that the people making up the militia would have access to the same quality of "small arms" as the formal government army. Certainly in the late 1770s, when the bill of right was drafted, the militia and formal continental army had access to the same weaponry. A militia musters with their own personal arms, while an army is issued arms by the government. When I studied American History in school, I was taught the preface “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state” meant/implied/stated the government had to maintain a well equipped and trained military to ensure the security of the nation. The second part “the right of the people to keep and bear arms” was to insure the military did not become all powerful and overthrow the Constitution. I believe the founding fathers chose their words very carefully to mean what they intended. TRH’s description of a militia certainly describes what I envision a militia to be, private citizens (people) ready to muster with their own arms when called. In my mind there is no doubt the founding fathers intended for private residents of the nation to have and possess the same arms as the military in order to keep the military under control. Has nothing to do with self-defense, hunting, target shooting, etc. I also believe government as well as the military are out of control.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,435
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,435 |
Also, the founding fathers' writings are full of references to the right of the citizenry to bear arms. Jefferson, Adams, Madison, et. al. wrote extensively about the intents of the Bill of Rights.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,966
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,966 |
Pardon my being aghast, "taught law school for six years"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 3,274
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 3,274 |
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" - I believe one could make the argument that the word Militia is an informal army of the people (not federal) and the term "militia" would suggest that the people making up the militia would have access to the same quality of "small arms" as the formal government army. Certainly in the late 1770s, when the bill of right was drafted, the militia and formal continental army had access to the same weaponry. A militia musters with their own personal arms, while an army is issued arms by the government. When I studied American History in school, I was taught the preface “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state” meant/implied/stated the government had to maintain a well equipped and trained military to ensure the security of the nation. The second part “the right of the people to keep and bear arms” was to insure the military did not become all powerful and overthrow the Constitution. I believe the founding fathers chose their words very carefully to mean what they intended. TRH’s description of a militia certainly describes what I envision a militia to be, private citizens (people) ready to muster with their own arms when called. In my mind there is no doubt the founding fathers intended for private residents of the nation to have and possess the same arms as the military in order to keep the military under control. Has nothing to do with self-defense, hunting, target shooting, etc. I also believe government as well as the military are out of control. It would be too long to paste here, but Justice Scalia's discussion of the meaning of the Second Amendment in the Heller case from 2008 answers all questions. It's also a brilliant, scholarly examination of the history of the inherent right every human has to bear arms. Heller opinion
Eliminate qualified immunity and you'll eliminate cops who act like they are above the law.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 131,819 Likes: 29
Campfire Sage
|
|
Campfire Sage
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 131,819 Likes: 29 |
Ok, but is there any reason to think they may be different in quality? Not at all.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 34,312 Likes: 10
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 34,312 Likes: 10 |
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" - I believe one could make the argument that the word Militia is an informal army of the people (not federal) and the term "militia" would suggest that the people making up the militia would have access to the same quality of "small arms" as the formal government army. Certainly in the late 1770s, when the bill of right was drafted, the militia and formal continental army had access to the same weaponry. A militia musters with their own personal arms, while an army is issued arms by the government. When I studied American History in school, I was taught the preface “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state” meant/implied/stated the government had to maintain a well equipped and trained military to ensure the security of the nation. The second part “the right of the people to keep and bear arms” was to insure the military did not become all powerful and overthrow the Constitution. I believe the founding fathers chose their words very carefully to mean what they intended. TRH’s description of a militia certainly describes what I envision a militia to be, private citizens (people) ready to muster with their own arms when called. In my mind there is no doubt the founding fathers intended for private residents of the nation to have and possess the same arms as the military in order to keep the military under control. Has nothing to do with self-defense, hunting, target shooting, etc. I also believe government as well as the military are out of control. It would be too long to paste here, but Justice Scalia's discussion of the meaning of the Second Amendment in the Heller case from 2008 answers all questions. It's also a brilliant, scholarly examination of the history of the inherent right every human has to bear arms. Heller opinionAs was Thomas in NYSRPA v Bruen. Look for both to be overturned during Biden’s second term.
Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Give a man a welfare check, a forty ounce malt liquor, a crack pipe, an Obama phone, free health insurance. and some Air Jordan's and he votes Democrat for a lifetime.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,414 Likes: 3
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,414 Likes: 3 |
Like Wyatt said to Ike Clanton….. “you’re friends might get me in a rush, but not before I make your head into a canoe” 😏
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,971 Likes: 9
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,971 Likes: 9 |
Well Steve I think that is certainly the intent of government, to overturn those decisions, by whatever means necessary.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 3,779 Likes: 2
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 3,779 Likes: 2 |
I'll do my best to make him send a F-16 to take my AR's.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 48,159 Likes: 14
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 48,159 Likes: 14 |
IF I have not said it already: FJB!!!
I try to stick with the basics, they do so well. Nothing fancy mind you, just plain jane will get it done with style. You want to see an animal drop right now? Shoot him in the ear hole. BSA MAGA
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2020
Posts: 5,296 Likes: 19
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jul 2020
Posts: 5,296 Likes: 19 |
Making an F16 strike when we are intermingled with innocents would put a serious dent in their will to launch additional F16 strikes. If we avoided strikes out of concerns over collateral damage in the Middle East, I'd like to think that we'd also do it on our home turf. I wouldn't be too sure of that. Hell, the more dead "innocents", the better. More deaths they can blame on the eeevil White extremists.... why just look at the devastation they have caused! They're the ones that set off the bombs that destroyed all those hospitals, schools, rest homes, homeless shelters, orphanages... blah, blah, blah....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 14,960 Likes: 8
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 14,960 Likes: 8 |
IF I have not said it already: FJB!!! Fugkin A
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 8,609
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 8,609 |
Coco Mellon Is a Prop for the Synagogue of Satan..
The Mellon ain’t working but he knows what their Saying ..
The Black Jesus summed up Coco Mellon abilities but we’re so far down the Rabbit Hole it doesn’t Matter what he says ..
Boy Scouts Motto
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 3,241
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 3,241 |
I dislike these conversations but...first you have to get an F-16 pilot or any armed service member to do the deed. I don't think they would. Even if you had a radical, they still understand their families and friends will be their victims or would quickly become targets. LEO's might start enforcing BS laws but I would think they would quickly realize they would be putting their family and networks at risk as well. Some might have a bloodlust or sense of duty but that would quickly erode when their family came up missing. Everybody has someone.
An insurgency is a living hell. Everybody could be an insurgent. They are everywhere and nowhere. You dudes that are all for this should have signed up up the military between 9/11 and 2020. Guarantee you would have your fill in the first week. It is hard to operate when every hair on your body is standing straight up and your spidey sense is whanging out constantly.
Like some wise Jap once said, "behind every blade of grass would be a gun".
-Piss into the wind.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 12,192
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 12,192 |
Maybe he's right, but I can't fly a 15 or build a nuke. History has shown however that all it takes to remove a president is a old Italian rifle
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 5,312
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 5,312 |
I don't need an F-16. All I need is a good rifle and the address of the F-16 pilot, and pictures of his kids, that Biden wants to send against me. I like the way this man thinks.
.... like tears in the rain
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 9,920 Likes: 1
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 9,920 Likes: 1 |
The US has not ever won a war against insurgents
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 21,861 Likes: 10
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 21,861 Likes: 10 |
The US has not ever won a war against insurgents Correct... Steve and his communist propaganda is about turning insurgents into sheep that will then disarm. Don't be a sheep... Don't be a Steve... ![[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]](https://i.postimg.cc/8ktR9J96/unnamedsddfsdaadg.png)
If you are not actively engaging EVERY enemy you encounter... you are allowing another to fight for you... and that is cowardice... plain and simple.
|
|
|
|
|
679 members (17CalFan, 160user, 204guy, 1badf350, 1beaver_shooter, 1234, 66 invisible),
3,159
guests, and
1,210
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,192,962
Posts18,499,194
Members73,983
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
