|
|
We appreciate your help
in keeping this site going.
|
|
08-01-2017, 11:35 AM
|
|
Resident octogenarian
|
|
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Maryland
Posts: 20,860
|
|
If you were to read James Madison's Notes on the debates of the Constitution you would realize that the 2nd applies to the formation of a common militia. Each of the 13 colonies had their own militia but they used different weapons of differing calibers, etc. Hence the "well regulated". Mad Uncle Wayne is so full of it , along with the Supremes that it is almost laughable. It is rather unfortunate that no one down here speaks English.
__________________
Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds discuss people.
Eleanor Roosevelt
|
08-02-2017, 08:56 AM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 13,016
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by merrylander
If you were to read James Madison's Notes on the debates of the Constitution you would realize that the 2nd applies to the formation of a common militia. Each of the 13 colonies had their own militia but they used different weapons of differing calibers, etc. Hence the "well regulated". Mad Uncle Wayne is so full of it , along with the Supremes that it is almost laughable. It is rather unfortunate that no one down here speaks English.
|
Oh, I think we can read just fine. We can also think.
Your argument pre-supposes that, in the early days of our country, someone who never used a firearm for their own purposes would simply show up and be prepared to use a firearm in armed conflict. You think Madison believed that militia folks would just show up when called and magically know how to use a gun? Since militia members were expected to bring their own firearms when called, do you think that they were expected to never use them unless the militia was activated? That's BS. They were expected to be proficient in the use of firearms, and were not provided with any formal training on how to use them, so learning how to use them was done as part of their day to day existence.
The Militia Act of 1792 was really the first attempt to "well - regulate" the militia. It codified the traditional view of the militia as consisting of all able- bodied citizens. It also required each militiaman to supply his own arms, and the law didn't provide any funding. So, I'm not sure how "well - regulated" the militias were as a practical matter.
|
08-02-2017, 10:01 AM
|
|
Rational Anarchist
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: DFW
Posts: 7,315
|
|
The second comes from the British constitution and exists for three reasons: 1) forming a militia to aid the sovereign in defense of the realm, 2) self defense and 3) overthrowing a tyrant.
__________________
"We have met the enemy and he is us."
|
08-02-2017, 10:56 AM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: NE Bamastan
Posts: 11,070
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by nailer
The second comes from the British constitution and exists for three reasons: 1) forming a militia to aid the sovereign in defense of the realm, 2) self defense and 3) overthrowing a tyrant.
|
It's the third point that concerns me as per the opening post. Up to the present, our system has managed to reign in excessive executive authority without the torches and pitchforks of popular revolt. Armed rebellion in any form has never fared well with this Republic.
__________________
I'll believe corporations are people when Texas executes one.
|
08-02-2017, 12:26 PM
|
|
Rational Anarchist
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: DFW
Posts: 7,315
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pio1980
It's the third point that concerns me as per the opening post. Up to the present, our system has managed to reign in excessive executive authority without the torches and pitchforks of popular revolt. Armed rebellion in any form has never fared well with this Republic.
|
We've yet to be ruled by a tyrant.
__________________
"We have met the enemy and he is us."
Last edited by nailer; 08-02-2017 at 12:30 PM.
|
08-02-2017, 12:33 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: NE Bamastan
Posts: 11,070
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by nailer
We've yet to be ruled by a tyrant.
|
I agree, tho some did accuse FDR. The present aspirant to that level of authority has found systemic and practical limits to his ambition.
__________________
I'll believe corporations are people when Texas executes one.
|
08-02-2017, 06:49 PM
|
|
AKA Sister Mary JJ
|
|
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Upper East Tennessee
Posts: 5,897
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by nailer
We've yet to be ruled by a tyrant.
|
That's right.
http://www.history.com/topics/americ...lution-history
__________________
"Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please." (Mark Twain)
|
08-02-2017, 07:02 PM
|
|
Admin
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Behind the Orange Curtain in California
Posts: 37,237
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by nailer
We've yet to be ruled by a tyrant.
|
Ol' King George was misunderstood.
__________________
I don't know half of you half as well as I should like, and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve.
- Mr. Underhill
|
08-03-2017, 09:11 AM
|
|
Rational Anarchist
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: DFW
Posts: 7,315
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobabode
Ol' King George was misunderstood.
|
Although he never ruled US, George III was indeed a tyrant from his rebelling colonists' perspective.
__________________
"We have met the enemy and he is us."
|
08-02-2017, 08:38 PM
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 1,164
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by whell
Oh, I think we can read just fine. We can also think.
Your argument pre-supposes that, in the early days of our country, someone who never used a firearm for their own purposes would simply show up and be prepared to use a firearm in armed conflict. You think Madison believed that militia folks would just show up when called and magically know how to use a gun? Since militia members were expected to bring their own firearms when called, do you think that they were expected to never use them unless the militia was activated? That's BS. They were expected to be proficient in the use of firearms, and were not provided with any formal training on how to use them, so learning how to use them was done as part of their day to day existence.
The Militia Act of 1792 was really the first attempt to "well - regulate" the militia. It codified the traditional view of the militia as consisting of all able- bodied citizens. It also required each militiaman to supply his own arms, and the law didn't provide any funding. So, I'm not sure how "well - regulated" the militias were as a practical matter.
|
It may be helpful for you to read a few serious scholastic books about the Revolutionary War, paying particular attention to the formation of the Army Quartermasters Corps, the Continental Marines, and the purchases the Continental Congress/Army made with France. You would not be advancing this alternative history re firearms.
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:13 AM.
|