All Gun Owners need to join the militia, as the 2nd requires...

By being an " able bodied males between the ages of 17 and 45" I am already a part of the militia. There is no need to register myself or my weapons with anyone.

The 2nd amendment is carte blanche to own anything that is considered arms. It does not exist to support the army, the state or the nation. It exists to ensure freedom. Our rights and freedoms, on guns and many other issues, are already restricted or limited far beyond what can reasonably considered a free state.

History has shown that gun registration and restriction has most often led to mass murders, oppression and tyranny.

Governments are created to secure the rights of the people. When any such government begins to limit, restrict or remove the rights from the people, the people have the duty to abolish such government. These are the words of our founders.

I personally will not give one more inch of my freedom. Let the government pass whatever laws or executive orders it sees fit. I will not obey any such law or decry that tells me I have too much freedom and I need to give some up. I have drawn my line in the sand and I will die to defend it. I rather die free, or fighting to be free, than to live oppressed and a slave.

reply to post by AwakeinNM


Anonymous? That is a joke right? Anonymous to who exactly? The rest of us here on ATS perhaps but not to TPTB. They know exactly who you are. They have for almost a decade or more.

Originally posted by stormson
reply to post by VictorVonDoom

 

military and law enforcement are already the militia. consider them "active militia", while the rest would be on reserve status with no requirements other than registering and reporting lost/stolen guns, and to assist the police in times of disaster.

mi·li·tia (m-lsh)
n.
1. An army composed of ordinary citizens rather than professional soldiers.
2. A military force that is not part of a regular army and is subject to call for service in an emergency.

By the definition you give, police and military would not be considered militia because they are professionals or part of the regular army. Therefore, any arms limitations would apply to them as well as any other non-militia member.

Originally posted by schuyler
A "well regulated militia" exists in Switzerland now where every male has a government furnished "assault" weapon and ammunition. They don't give these back, either.

Schuyler, if you are going to keep using Switzerland as an example you need to read up on the facts. They are not allowed to keep ammunition for their assault rifles for example. Also, their firearm is converted to semi-automatic if they want to keep it.

en.wikipedia.org...

I don't hide behind militia's or the police, or the government have people not figured out the end game here?

Create a dependency based society and outsource everything to the Government that makes us all slaves..

In a Republic that master has an always been the people as in the individual.

Originally posted by stormson
The second amendment states "well regulated militia". So if you want to do real gun regulation/control, make gun owners, or those that want to own guns, go to the local sheriff and join the militia. The militia will only be called up for natural disasters, like river floods or whatever, and fill sand bags or patrol with police to keep looting down.

There's a few problems with this.

1. The right to keep and bear arms is an individual right, not a right granted to the militia. The requirement that a free state possess a militia is given as a reason for the right, but the right is not limited to the militia itself. The Amendment was written in certain political and social circumstances, but it declares and protects an inherent right that exists in other circumstances. You don't think the First Amendment only protects the rights of Federalist pamphleteers and Protestants, do you?

2. The local sheriff has nothing to do with the militia, except perhaps an occasional interagency exercise or scenario.

3. The militia in the United States comprises two classes, the organized militia and the unorganized militia. The organized militia is the National Guard and Naval Militia. These, you can join at your own discretion (if you can get in). The unorganized militia is nearly all able-bodied males between 17 and 45. So by your own logic, males between 17 and 45 have the right to keep and bear arms, but women do not. Why don't you want women to be armed? Do you like the idea of women as victims? Do you think gender roles should revert to the 18th century?

Originally posted by boymonkey74
reply to post by AwakeinNM

 

You do know that you have just admitted to having unregistered guns on ATS don't you lol.
You can bet ATS is one of the first sites they will look for to find domestic terrorists don't you?

Oh and "Until Iam needed" lol Hooray here comes AwakeinNM to save the day oh how I laughed.

edit on 9-1-2013 by boymonkey74 because: (no reason given)

I won't be defending your limey ass, that's for sure.

By the way, the government already knows who owns what with regard to firearms, unless someone bought one from another individual. So I did not admit to anything.

How about you mind your business? Go boil some meat or something.

reply to post by AwakeinNM





Oh man you are just so funny, protect me? trust me you are the last person in the world I would want to protect me.
Wanna be Rambo with all bark and no bite
You keep on saying you will do something but so far you have done nothing, they have already taken away many of your freedoms but here you are still bleating BS.

Originally posted by boymonkey74
reply to post by AwakeinNM

 

Oh man you are just so funny, protect me? trust me you are the last person in the world I would want to protect me.
Wanna be Rambo with all bark and no bite

Really funny eh ?

That is how most of us feel bout Government playing Rambo.

Originally posted by exitusstatuquo
reply to post by AwakeinNM

 

Anonymous? That is a joke right? Anonymous to who exactly? The rest of us here on ATS perhaps but not to TPTB. They know exactly who you are. They have for almost a decade or more.

I know this. I am sure that I am not anonymous on here (nor is anyone) insofar as the NSA can easily cross-reference IP addresses to email addresses.

It's always hilarious to hear people attacking the Second amendment with that argument. I have an argument that should put that to rest for good. Are Corporations people? The Supreme Court seems to think so.

Since at least Trustees of Dartmouth College v. Woodward – 17 U.S. 518 (1819), the U.S. Supreme Court has recognized corporations as having the same rights as natural persons to contract and to enforce contracts.

en.wikipedia.org...

If Corporations can be people, then Individual people can be a militia unto themselves. Enough said.

reply to post by stormson


Except you forgot the part about tyranny foreign OR Domestic. Think you might want to re-make that statement. I think that smarter heads prevail everytime someone start yelling revolt.

The smarter thing to do is to wait until its supported by the majority or at least have military pull. Let's not forget that there are a ton of military that feels the squeeze and has family who will most likely be affected by this. It will cause many to abandon their post and take up arms against the tyranny in this country.

reply to post by Mr. D

The Supreme Court does not feel that corporations are people. From the first paragraph of your source:

Corporate personhood is the legal concept that a corporation may sue and be sued in court in the same way as natural persons or unincorporated associations of persons. This doctrine in turn forms the basis for legal recognition that corporations, as groups of people, may hold and exercise certain rights under the common law and the U.S. Constitution. The doctrine does not hold that corporations are "people" in the most common usage of the word, nor does it grant to corporations all of the rights of citizens. (emphasis added)

Does anyone want to come with me to plattsburgh afb to rescue the hostages?

informeddecisionmaker
Does anyone want to come with me to plattsburgh afb to rescue the hostages?

I have no idea what you are talking about.

As for the OPs statement .... I am a militia of one. Case closed.

The every gun owner has to join the militia to keep their guns is just as silly as the gun owners who think they are going to fight off the ebil guberment with their guns. Their is a reason the traditional idea of militas are not a part of modern miltiaries. They are combat ineffective and more trouble that they are worth. You will still find them in the third world where they are called home defense units or such in areas where Governments have little control. They are often nothing more than armed gangs that are a bigger threat to those they are suppose to be protecting than the enemy. The closest things to miltias in the US are the National Guards who do have monthly training but, aways need a bunch of additional training before being sent into combat. And you have the State Defense Force which are the closest thing you will find to traditional militias, Unpayed volunteers although they have no combat or defense role, most are unarmed and used mostly for disaster support. Which is really the only place they can have an effective role.

Always something when an old thread comes back to life, buy since it wasn't mentioned earlier...Congress is supposed to arm, supply and maintain the militia when they call it forth.

Therefore any elected official trying to remove arms is not only doing so contrary to the Second, but can be guilty of attempting to subvert Article 1 for not providing for the militia since everyone is the militia that volunteers to be the militia.

I think I would like a tank just in case Canada gets froggy.

reply to post by stormson


Title 10 USC 311. Militia composition and classes.
The Gist of it...

All able-bodied americans from 17 to 45 years of age are members of the Militia. American women who are members of the national guard are members of the Militia. Former members of the U.S.Army, navy, air force and Marine corps are members of the Militia until 64 years of age. (described in 32-313). The national guard and naval militia are called the organized Militia. The unorganized militia is everyone in the militia who is not in the national guard or the naval militia.

Yes, yes we are.

stormson

If you think the second was written to protect us from our own gov, well youre wrong. It was written so that if the states were invaded (at the time by the French, Spanish, Brittish, Natives) the people could defend themselves and support the U.S. gov in the form of militias.

What do you think?

I think you need to re study the Declaration of Independence and US Constitution because you have no clue what your talking about.

First gun owners are Not " required" to do anything of the sort. Your suggestion seems to imply that it is our duty to allow the powers that be to monitor our gun usage as well as have our names and addresses on file - What - no Privacy? Your advocating Big Brother.

Secondly.. the Declaration of Independence was the forerunner of the Constitution in that it laid down the mood and feelings of the people toward abuses by Government and any tyranny that came from that government.

That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Declaration of Independence

These attitudes did not change when the Constitution was drafted but rather incorporated into the Constitution so such tyranny could not happen again. We The People would be able to maintain control over such a government. ( in theory anyway - perhaps in practice for such a small group of early Americans - they did not imagine a world 200 years later when the government and corporate interest were so corrupt that it becomes almost impossible to apply.)

They understood a concept used by other Governments at the time called the Right of Revolution.

American Revolution: The right to revolution would play a large part in the writings of the American revolutionaries. The political tract Common Sense used the concept as an argument for rejection of the British Monarchy and separation from the Empire, as opposed to merely self-government within it. It was also cited in the Declaration of Independence of the United States, when a group of representatives from the various states signed a declaration of independence citing charges against King George III. As the American Declaration of Independence in 1776 expressed it, natural law taught that the people were “endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights” and could alter or abolish government “destructive” of those rights.

en.wikipedia.org...

It can be shown as well that these ideas were added to individual States Constitutions - After the Revolutionary war mind you - This dealt with not the overthrow of the Monarchy because we were already Free from the Monarchy - it applied to We The People vs The American Government if in fact that government should become tyrannical.

Certain scholars, such as legal historian Christian Fritz, have written that with the end of the Revolution, Americans did not renounce the right of revolution. In fact they codified it in their new constitutions.[11] For instance, constitutions considered to be "conservative," such as those of post-revolutionary Massachusetts in 1780, preserved the people's right "to reform, alter, or totally change" government not only for their protection or safety but also whenever their "prosperity and happiness reduire[d] it."[12] This expression was not unusual in the early American constitutions. Connecticut's 1818 constitution articulated the people's right "at all times" to alter government "in such a manner as they may think expedient."[13]

Fritz, in American Sovereigns: The People and America's Constitutional Tradition Before the Civil War, describes a duality in American views on preconditions to the right of revolution: "Some of the first state constitutions included 'alter or abolish' provisions that mirrored the traditional right of revolution" in that they required dire preconditions to its exercise.[14] Maryland's 1776 constitution and New Hampshire's 1784 constitutions required the perversion of the ends of government and the endangering of public liberty and that all other means of redress were to no avail.[15] But in contrast, other states dispensed with the onerous preconditions on the exercise of the right. In the 1776 Virginia constitution the right would arise simply if government was "inadequate" and Pennsylvania's 1776 constitution required only that the people considered a change to be "most conducive" to the public welfare.

en.wikipedia.org... ( under Preconditions)

Also keep in mind the US Constitution was also written After we declared independence by the Monarchy and the Revolutionary war was Over. There was no longer any reason to think we would need to go to war with England again - the Constitution dealt with We the People vs Our Government on our own soil - just as the States Constitutions did.

Now the Government as such did not want Anarchy to arise so they tried to make ways in which We The People could reform government without bloodshed or civil wars. This is Only applicable in peace time when everyone is willing to work together. They still understood when push came to shove it is We The People that should have the last say over if our government remains intact in it's present state - or not and that armed revolution was a viable option if needed.

The purpose to keep and bear arms is for the security of a Free State - even against our own government.

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.

(As passed by the Congress and preserved in the National Archives)

Later the Supreme Court ruled that you do not have to belong to a militia to have this right. See District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), United States v. Miller - en.wikipedia.org... - down the page listed under United States Courts of Appeals decisions before and after Heller

boymonkey74
reply to post by AwakeinNM

 

You do know that you have just admitted to having unregistered guns on ATS don't you lol.
You can bet ATS is one of the first sites they will look for to find domestic terrorists don't you?

Just FYI - in many states you do not have to register certain guns AT ALL. They don't need any registration or permits - the government never has to know you own the guns.

In my state Louisiana I can legally own my 22 long sport king pistol with extra long 6 inch refiled barrel and it's a 12 shot semi automatic - fires as fast as I pull the trigger. For a 22 it's very deadly with the extra powder ( longs are longer bullets with more gunpowder for extra power) and long refiled barrel. These guns are so deadly they are the number one choice used by assassins and yet, I can own as many as I like and no one has to know.