Politics and stuff

"Well-regulated"

Y'all keep skipping that part

Thanks for pointing that out.
It means to practice drills with your home boys at the town square, so you're ready for BLM and Antifa.
You must have learned history by watching The View.

Are you practing drills in a well-regulated way? If you're regulating yourselves, that's... not it.

If you spent as much time learning English versus being wrong on the internet - you’d know there are two parts to the second amendment. Assuming you’ve read it of course. If not, here is a break down for you:

First, a well regulated militia being necessary for the security of a free state.

Second, the right of the people to keep and bare arms shall not be infringed.

Damn that tricky semicolon got’em again.

You don't know what a semicolon is. There isn't one.

I do; but redacted statement. I looked at someone else’s shit which mistakenly had a semicolon - so half apologies there.

Either way, if you look at the full context of the amendment - it mentions two separate entities: the “well regulated militia” and “the people”. To make it one and the same statement would have to make the assumption that it is one and the same.

It's one of the most poorly written pieces of Iegislation in history. There's commas everywhere. Strictly speaking, if you take out the commad clauses, you get "A well regulated militia shall not be infringed" which makes no mention of private citizens whatsoever!

Sure, but then you are re-writing the amendment to remove private citizens. It is a grammatical disaster - for our present time in history, but that doesn’t take away it’s weight and priority.

Yes it does - poorly written laws ABSOLUTELY take away from their weight until we all get together AND F**KING CLARIFY THEM.

And the reason you don't want that is because you know full well just how unpopular your anything-goes-with-guns interpretation is going to be!

Believe what you want.

I bet there were people just like you saying “Ain’t gonna be no war” just before both the Revolutionary and Civil wars.

There are those who want constitutional America and there are those that want socialist America.

Regardless of who “wins” - we all lose. The extremist attack on the constitution will only spark more violence even if it isn’t considered all out war.

You don't have anywhere NEAR the traction that there was prior to the Revolution and the Civil War. January 6th was proof of that. There's not enough of you to escalate this. Engage in the legislation or be sidelined by the people who do - those are really your only options.

Wow...two people equally ignorant arguing about something they know nothing about.

Who’s arguing? I didn’t realize debate wasn’t allowed here on ImgFlip?

Want to join in with valid points or just sit in the stands heckling?

But that’s not going to happen. If you think people are going to just sit tight while Biden and the far-left attempt to reinterpret the amendments and re-write them to fit their policies.. well - let’s just say I can already smell the gunpowder.

For f**k's sakes, how much more needs to happen before you realize that your Muppet uprising isn't going to gain anywhere NEAR the traction it needs to?

Ain't gonna be no war. You wouldn't have popular backing if you did. You wouldn't have international support if you did. The most damage you'll EVER do to the government is to waste police time.

This WILL have a legislative solution, one way or the other, whether we have to work against y'all every step of the way or not.

Wow...two people equally ignorant arguing about something they know nothing about.

The entire constitution is about the citizens lol.

I took firearm safety classes and practice at the shooting range. I'm "well regulated"

Is this satire? Seeing your comments here, I'm sure this won't convince you, because it seems you want to believe what you want to believe; but I'll give it a shot anyway. Firstly, the amendments don't give power to the federal government, but to the people, the states. Thus, "well-regulated", even if it meant what you think it means, would be for the states to regulate, and not the federal government (see the 10th amendment). Secondly, to understand what the constitution actually means, one needs to look at the debates which formed and created it (not what people, either Republican or Democrat, wish it said). Another good way is to look at the states at this time, which reflect exactly what I'm talking about. For example, both North Carolina and Virginia stated that "the people have a right to keep and bear arms; that a well regulated malitia, composed of the body of the people trained in arms (i.e. regulated), is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state (Virginia); that standing armies (the federal government), in times of peace, are dangerous to liberty, and therefore ought to be avoided. So here we have "regulated" but it means, a non standing army, also not the National Guard (that came later), but a militia, full of non professionals (the people), ready to defend themselves and their state if they need to. Further, Elbridge Gerry, debating the 2nd amendment in 1789, said this "What, sir, is the use of a militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty... Whenever governments mean to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise an army upon the ruins" So no, the 2nd amendment had nothing to do with slavery or Reconstruction, but with holding off tyranny. I'll end with this "What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms."
- Thomas Jefferson, letter to James Madison, December 20, 1787

EXACTLY!!!!

If state government is "the people" then so are federal government. If federal government isn't then state government isn't. They're the same go***mned thing but at different tiers. If that is what the second amendment meant by that, they would have said so - they argued about the wording for YEARS when it was written.

My God man, but you sure are ignorant.
Stop spouting off about things you obviously don't know anything about.

Then did say so, it's called the 10th amendment; “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people”. Further, they did not argue about this amendment for years, if fact, hardly at all. The only thing they thought about was attaching a clause from exempting certain religious people from joining a militia for religious reasons. Politicians, who say the Founders were not in agreement about this issue, and that their intention isn't clear are lying. You don't have to agree with guns, but that's completely different than acting like the Founder's words are a complete enigma. Cheers

They really really did. The second amendment went through several drafts and rewrites. It was fiercely contested even then.

What [deleted] said!!
"Well regulated" meant being able to load and fire 3 rounds in a minute using 10 "regulated" steps.

What you don't know about history and guns would fill volumes.

No. It says "well regulated milita". It does not say "well regulated firing mechanism".

It EXPLICITLY says that YOU have to face regulations. YOU, merryprankster.

As I said before, there are volumes of what you don't know about history, guns, and now the Constitution and how the framers spoke and wrote in the 18th century.

Ok. It still says well regulated militia not well regulated firing mechanism.

Ok. You're still an ignorant ass.

The "well regulated" part means we can have a large comprehensive militia absent of government oversight. Because it's we the people. You shouldn't of skipped that constitution interpretation class

Like the Capitol rioters?

Nobody cares about the capital riots. You say it like it has weight

We'll see who cares when the traitors get lengthy prison sentences.

But now the people know they can just stroll in there whenever they want. ...bc it belongs to the people

No, THEY thought they had weight. Typical TrumpTards.

They do. And capital hill is very nervous

Why? The unhinged Right is planning another insurrection?

If even a tenth of the people there had rioted, we'd be electing new reps now. It wasn't a riot it was a few dozen people let in by police that did some minor vandalism who are now being torture in prison.

Well-regulated LITERALLY requires government oversight BY DEFINITION.

The fox guarding the chicken coop is not good regulation!

No
It
Does
NOT
!
!

Yeah, it really does. If the only accountability that you ever have to face is that you pinky swearsies that you have the best of intentions then THAT IS NOT WELL REGULATED.

Nope. It means practiced.

The whole idea of the second is guns....absent the government.

Slave patrols, actually. It was more guns for the government at its very heart.

Not really seeing what's unclear here. The entire constitution starts with "we the people". The 2nd was put in place so that the government and elite couldn't oppress the people. A check and balance. Because the founding fathers learned from thousands of years of oppression. It's not for hunting.
Do you believe that they wrote it "for the government to have guns". Lol, do you believe we would give control of our check and balance to the people that we're trying to check and balance?

No, the second ammendment was put in place so that slave states could form patrol squads to hunt down runaways. Your interpretation of its purpose wasn't a thing until Reconstruction.

All interpretations aside.....I got to ask....do you believe that citizens should have the right to bare guns to defend themselves?

It's shouldn't HAVE, by the way. A bit of a mistake to make in a discussion about semantics.