It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Comprehending the 2nd Amendment

page: 7
6
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 19 2018 @ 07:46 PM
link   
a reply to: elysiumfire
The SCOTUS has already ruled that "the police" are not obligated to "protect" you. That's another modern lie/misunderstanding. "Protect and Serve" was a advertising campaign. No police department can be held negligent in failing to protect you. Why you would expect another human being to do so excapes me... Anyway. It has already been decided in the law that the police are not there to P&S.




posted on Feb, 19 2018 @ 09:05 PM
link   
a reply to: elysiumfire

You start a thread about comprehending the 2nd Amendment, but it seems you really don't comprehend it, even with as much as you wrote. You certain ascribe and intrepret things in ways the founders never intended, beccause there's plenty of their writings which make their intent very clear on the constitution.



posted on Feb, 20 2018 @ 11:39 PM
link   
Your interpretation is just wrong - it specifically says the right of the people to bear arms

On top of that you are ignoring a ton of historical context that reflects the opinions of these same writers indicating in their own words that they clearly intended individuals to own and carry arms.

Historical ignorance.



posted on Feb, 21 2018 @ 04:27 AM
link   
There is no ignoring the fact that "The right to bear arms" is just too ambiguous, because when those words were written, you could basically own a cannon, down to a flintlock musket. Today, in a literal sense, it is like a missile launcher, down to a Glock.

The right to bear arms has, and always has had, an identity crisis.

We have absolutely no line in the sand to base any other opinions of what defines self defense.

How could there ever be any kind of gun reform, when we cannot even agree on what is considered sane and insane, for a public citizen to own?

I hope the younger generation are able to solve this, and bring about the required change. Basically, my generation(s) has utterly failed.



posted on Feb, 21 2018 @ 05:47 AM
link   
Many people misunderstand militia as used in the constitution and in the 2nd amendment.

In Article 1; section 8, clauses 15 and 16 of the Constitution is the power of the Organized militia – consisting of State militia forces; notably, the National Guard and Naval Militia.

The 2nd amendment covers the Unorganized militia – composing the Reserve Militia: every able-bodied man of at least 17 and under 45(maybe older since many people live longer then in the 1700s) years of age, not a member of the National Guard or Naval Militia.

Due to the time it took for news of a attack to reach the state and federal capitals many problems were taken care of by the Unorganized militia till help could come from the state and federal government.

And do not think it could not happen today.
If the US was hit by a EMP attack the Unorganized militia would be the only force out there for weeks or longer.

And it likely would be run by the local sheriff using retired cops, military veterans and CCW holders,
I got this from a rural calif sheriff who said these are people that he could VET without computer records and communication that would be lost in a EMP attack.


edit on 21-2-2018 by ANNED because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 21 2018 @ 01:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: ANNED
Many people misunderstand militia as used in the constitution and in the 2nd amendment.

In Article 1; section 8, clauses 15 and 16 of the Constitution is the power of the Organized militia – consisting of State militia forces; notably, the National Guard and Naval Militia.

The 2nd amendment covers the Unorganized militia – composing the Reserve Militia: every able-bodied man of at least 17 and under 45(maybe older since many people live longer then in the 1700s) years of age, not a member of the National Guard or Naval Militia.

Due to the time it took for news of a attack to reach the state and federal capitals many problems were taken care of by the Unorganized militia till help could come from the state and federal government.

And do not think it could not happen today.
If the US was hit by a EMP attack the Unorganized militia would be the only force out there for weeks or longer.

And it likely would be run by the local sheriff using retired cops, military veterans and CCW holders,
I got this from a rural calif sheriff who said these are people that he could VET without computer records and communication that would be lost in a EMP attack.



Obviously, most of those in an unorganized militia have personal weapons, but would a Sheriff be allowed to issue weapons (in an emergency) from a local armory?



posted on Feb, 24 2018 @ 06:58 AM
link   
The only possible implementation of the 2nd amendment is the "Absolutist" implementation. Often one argument is heard against the 2nd amendment:

- Even with the 2nd amendment, US citizens would not be able to fight against its own army!

Without realizing that the US constitution forbids a standing army and through the 2nd amendment institutes the people's militia

That's the only protection the US is going to get from an invasion. The current oligarch's owned army is completely useless in defending the US and only drags it into more foreign troubles.




top topics



 
6
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join