A Well Regulated Militia

[Justin Thyme]

The 2nd amendment to the constitution says that as long as I am a law abiding citizen (well regulated militia) the government does not have the authority to prevent me from being armed. The Supreme Court of the United States of America has determined that my right to be armed does not include the right to own dangerous AND unusual weapons. The “and” in that clause means that the weapon must be both dangerous and unusual for the government to have any say in the ownership of one.

With this being the law of the land it doesn’t matter if you can’t understand why I would want or need a semi-automatic rifle capable of accepting a large capacity magazine. There are millions of these weapons available these days so it is not an unusual weapon. I have a right to own one and I don’t have to justify my need or want to you, the federal government or anyone else to obtain permission to buy one.

See, it drops back to that clause, “a well regulated militia.” Read that as, “a law abiding citizen,” because it is the same thing. Nothing good can come from disarming law abiding citizens.

[Half-Tard]

Well I'm going to place and order for a tank and F-16 Tomahawk..

[Justin Thyme]

The only thing stopping you on either one might be your bank account. Working tanks are starting out at around $300k. The F16 will set you back a few million. Both are also very expensive to maintain and operate.

[Half-Tard]

After doing research you're right. First you have to find one, All the weaponry is removed any technology that is still secret is removed on Aircraft. They say F-16 is out of the question right now still has too much top secret technology. Tanks same thing hard to find all weaponry removed. I guess the gun control crowd better get on this is rape of their rights as well.

[wheels]

i'm sure a tank or an F16 would fall under the "dangerous AND unusual" category. not too many of those being sold at walmart or gun shows.

[JC]

Surplus military vehicles is a big hobby for some and big business for others. Because of the enormous cost, tanks are not as popular as other non-armored vehicles. Even the ammunition can be purchased or made. In addition to the cost of the ammunition, it will cost $200 per round for a tax stamp from the ATF... but it's still available.

Check out this place in Minnesota

[wheels]

Jan 21, 2013 13:51:05 GMT -5 JC said:

Surplus military vehicles is a big hobby for some and big business for others. Because of the enormous cost, tanks are not as popular as other non-armored vehicles. Even the ammunition can be purchased or made. In addition to the cost of the ammunition, it will cost $200 per round for a tax stamp from the ATF... but it's still available.

Ok, but the weapons system for the tank must be disabled, right? There goes the main "danger." That turns it into a really heavy armored vehicle. I'm sure you have to jump through a lot of hoops and bureaucratic red tape to gain a license to own most active military surplus weapons. b/c of the cost and government requirements, that would make them "unusual. these items seem to meet both of the criteria that JiT laid out.

i could be wrong, but i would think that buying a tank with a working weapons system would get you a very unpleasant visit from the ATF. if you have to get the government's permission, it is not a right.

[Justin Thyme]

I fear the gist of what I was trying to say has been completely lost.

[frayne]

The founding fathers saw fit to use, “a well regulated militia” and not “a law abiding citizen,” and it is not the same thing, apples and oranges.

As ratified by the States and authenticated by Thomas Jefferson, Secretary of State:

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.

[wheels]

"the right of the people"

[Justin Thyme]

Jan 23, 2013 7:28:55 GMT -5 frayne said:

The founding fathers saw fit to use, “a well regulated militia” and not “a law abiding citizen,” and it is not the same thing, apples and oranges.

So what is a "well regulated" militia if not a group of law abiding citizens formed together for the defense of their community?

As ratified by the States and authenticated by Thomas Jefferson, Secretary of State:

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.

A group of armed but law abiding citizens being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infrined.

I honestly don't see a difference. I see apples and apples. Please explain to me the difference you see.

[ssmynkint]

Pretty simple, really. "Well regulated" is organized, structured, with chains of command , control & accountability. Not just"law abiding citizens" (like the KKK?) free-lancing their notion of justice & defense.

[Justin Thyme]

The KKK was never law abiding. Vigilantes are not law abiding. You can not have a well regulated militia without law abiding citizens making it up. Without law abiding citizens you will have an outlaw gang, not a well regulated militia.

[JC]

"the people" make up the "well regulated militia".

"well regulated" is not defined.

Seems fairly simple to me :shrugs:

[LimitedRecourse]

JC & JT: You are trying to argue semantics with people who believe that a human fetus is NOT a baby and can be killed at the whim of it's mother, yet think having scrambled eagle's eggs is horrible because you would be killing all the little eaglets. Logic fails in so many ways.

[Deleted]

Eagle eggs! MMMmmmmm.