The argument that the 2A is talking about the National Guard or something similar falls flat on its face from the get go. The Constitution and BOR is a list of negative liberties of govt. and a list of positive liberties for the people. The BOR specifically is a list of things govts. can NOT do. So how anyone could even attempt to make an argument that the second is the exception to this fact, and protects the rights of govts. to be armed exhibits a serious flaw in logic.
Add to that, the second amendment is one of only two that specifically have "the right of the people" language in it, you are seriously fighting an uphill battle that the 2A is about the military or Nat Guard's right to be armed. Along with the fact that the second amendment follows only the right to speak out against your govt. in the hierarchy of rights listed in the BOR.
Also to bolster the case, the phrase "well regulated" meant this in the period of our founding.
You can reasonably deduce the meaning of "regulated" to be "well provisioned" or "prepared". This makes the modern laymen reading of the 2A to be "A well prepared militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
The most disturbing thing to me is that we have 4 justices on the supreme court that cannot understand this most basic of legal documents. They clearly have willful disregard for the intent of the second amendment in favor of their personal agendas.
Add to that, the second amendment is one of only two that specifically have "the right of the people" language in it, you are seriously fighting an uphill battle that the 2A is about the military or Nat Guard's right to be armed. Along with the fact that the second amendment follows only the right to speak out against your govt. in the hierarchy of rights listed in the BOR.
Also to bolster the case, the phrase "well regulated" meant this in the period of our founding.
You can reasonably deduce the meaning of "regulated" to be "well provisioned" or "prepared". This makes the modern laymen reading of the 2A to be "A well prepared militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
The most disturbing thing to me is that we have 4 justices on the supreme court that cannot understand this most basic of legal documents. They clearly have willful disregard for the intent of the second amendment in favor of their personal agendas.
Are you gonna give us the signal from the bell tower or will it be in a tweet or something??
The shot heard round the world.
So I guess it's time for a second job just to fund ammo and weapons. Primary job pays all the bills, put money in my savings, and ensures my family has to want for nothing. Secondary job will be to buy firearms, support my hobbies (archery and shootings), buy more arms (knives, bows, etc), and LOTS of AMMO.
Word of advice... Start reloading. Once you have the equipment and the brass, Reloading become WAY more cost effective and it better ammo, especially in the larger calibers. I can reload 300 Win Mag or 338 Mag for 12-14 dollars (Premium Ammo not the low end stuff) a box with the brass I currently have. Go to public ranges and pick up range brass 99% of people leave it laying around and it the single most expensive part of reloading and when the crap hits the fan you can sit back and roll your own…
Those who argue that a citizen's rebellion couldn't withstand modern military firepower are not very familiar with the history of insurgency... especially recent history. That is a big part of the problem with antis... they are talking about a lot of subjects of which they have very little knowledge. Unfortunately neither does the majority of the public. We should educate them the best we can.
Similar threads
