[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Police clash with pro-Palestine protesters on Ohio State University campus

Joe Rogan Experience #2138 - Tucker Carlson

Police Dispersing Student Protesters at USC - Breaking News Coverage (College Protests)

What Passover Means For The New Testament Believer

Are We Closer Than Ever To The Next Pandemic?

War in Ukraine Turns on Russia

what happened during total solar eclipse

Israel Attacks Iran, Report Says - LIVE Breaking News Coverage

Earth is Scorched with Heat

Antiwar Activists Chant ‘Death to America’ at Event Featuring Chicago Alderman

Vibe Shift

A stream that makes the pleasant Rain sound.

Older Men - Keep One Foot In The Dark Ages

When You Really Want to Meet the Diversity Requirements

CERN to test world's most powerful particle accelerator during April's solar eclipse

Utopian Visionaries Who Won’t Leave People Alone

No - no - no Ain'T going To get away with iT

Pete Buttplug's Butt Plugger Trying to Turn Kids into Faggots

Mark Levin: I'm sick and tired of these attacks

Questioning the Big Bang

James Webb Data Contradicts the Big Bang

Pssst! Don't tell the creationists, but scientists don't have a clue how life began

A fine romance: how humans and chimps just couldn't let go

Early humans had sex with chimps

O’Keefe dons bulletproof vest to extract undercover journalist from NGO camp.

Biblical Contradictions (Alleged)

Catholic Church Praising Lucifer

Raising the Knife

One Of The HARDEST Videos I Had To Make..

Houthi rebels' attack severely damages a Belize-flagged ship in key strait leading to the Red Sea (British Ship)

Chinese Illegal Alien. I'm here for the moneuy

Red Tides Plague Gulf Beaches

Tucker Carlson calls out Nikki Haley, Ben Shapiro, and every other person calling for war:

{Are there 7 Deadly Sins?} I’ve heard people refer to the “7 Deadly Sins,” but I haven’t been able to find that sort of list in Scripture.

Abomination of Desolation | THEORY, BIBLE STUDY

Bible Help

Libertysflame Database Updated

Crush EVERYONE with the Alien Gambit!

Vladimir Putin tells Tucker Carlson US should stop arming Ukraine to end war

Putin hints Moscow and Washington in back-channel talks in revealing Tucker Carlson interview

Trump accuses Fulton County DA Fani Willis of lying in court response to Roman's motion

Mandatory anti-white racism at Disney.

Iceland Volcano Erupts For Third Time In 2 Months, State Of Emergency Declared

Tucker Carlson Interview with Vladamir Putin

How will Ar Mageddon / WW III End?

What on EARTH is going on in Acts 16:11? New Discovery!

2023 Hottest in over 120 Million Years

2024 and beyond in prophecy

Questions

This Speech Just Broke the Internet


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Bang / Guns
See other Bang / Guns Articles

Title: Letter: Put all gun owners in a well-regulated militia
Source: Salt Lake Tribune
URL Source: [None]
Published: Oct 5, 2015
Author: Robert Hammer
Post Date: 2015-10-05 12:40:40 by tpaine
Keywords: None
Views: 5117
Comments: 44

Letter: Put all gun owners in a well-regulated militia

Here's a completely constitutional gun-control measure Congress should consider: Establish a robust national militia, but specify that every gun owner become a member. Failure to register with the militia should result in serious jail time.

In the obvious interest of knowing the quantity and quality of arms available to the militia's purposes, all members should be required to inventory all of their personal arms. Failure to do so should also warrant significant jail time.

In the equally obvious interest of ensuring that these arms might be deployed in effective defense of the security of our free state, militia members should be required to participate in regular, highly disciplined training. Here again, failure to participate should earn offenders ample time behind bars to ponder the deficiencies of their unpatriotic souls.

Would this eradicate gun violence from our society? Of course not. But it would bring desperately needed regulation to bear. Our beloved 2nd Amendment clearly stipulates that the primary purpose of the right to keep and bear arms is in support of a "well regulated" militia, and Article I, Section 8, gives Congress the power to regulate the hell out of those keeping and bearing in that capacity.

Robert Hammer


Poster Comment:

I'm surprised Hillary hasn't picked up on this oh so clever idea. Theoretically, I suppose Congress could pass such a bill, but I doubt even a liberal SCOTUS would agree that such an obvious 'end around' the intent of the 2nd would pass constitutional muster..

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 39.

#18. To: tpaine (#0)

Letter: Put all gun owners in a well-regulated militia

Here's a completely constitutional gun-control measure Congress should consider: Establish a robust national militia, but specify that every gun owner become a member. Failure to register with the militia should result in serious jail time.

In the obvious interest of knowing the quantity and quality of arms available to the militia's purposes, all members should be required to inventory all of their personal arms. Failure to do so should also warrant significant jail time.

In the equally obvious interest of ensuring that these arms might be deployed in effective defense of the security of our free state, militia members should be required to participate in regular, highly disciplined training. Here again, failure to participate should earn offenders ample time behind bars to ponder the deficiencies of their unpatriotic souls.

Would this eradicate gun violence from our society? Of course not. But it would bring desperately needed regulation to bear. Our beloved 2nd Amendment clearly stipulates that the primary purpose of the right to keep and bear arms is in support of a "well regulated" militia, and Article I, Section 8, gives Congress the power to regulate the hell out of those keeping and bearing in that capacity.

Robert Hammer

It would be helpful if the author knew the meaning of "well regulated" and had consulted 10 U.S.C. 311 to learn that, "The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard."

Nobody registers with the militia as they are automatically in the militia per statute.

Moreover, it is unconstitutional to enact any form of state or federal law that conflicts with the constitutional provision, "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

http://www.constitution.org/cons/wellregu.htm

The meaning of the phrase "well-regulated" in the 2nd amendment

From: Brian T. Halonen

The following are taken from the Oxford English Dictionary, and bracket in time the writing of the 2nd amendment:

1709: "If a liberal Education has formed in us well-regulated Appetites and worthy Inclinations."

1714: "The practice of all well-regulated courts of justice in the world."

1812: "The equation of time ... is the adjustment of the difference of time as shown by a well-regulated clock and a true sun dial."

1848: "A remissness for which I am sure every well-regulated person will blame the Mayor."

1862: "It appeared to her well-regulated mind, like a clandestine proceeding."

1894: "The newspaper, a never wanting adjunct to every well-regulated American embryo city."

The phrase "well-regulated" was in common use long before 1789, and remained so for a century thereafter. It referred to the property of something being in proper working order. Something that was well-regulated was calibrated correctly, functioning as expected. Establishing government oversight of the people's arms was not only not the intent in using the phrase in the 2nd amendment, it was precisely to render the government powerless to do so that the founders wrote it.

http://law.justia.com/codes/us/2012/title-10/subtitle-a/part-i/chapter-13/section-311/

THE MILITIA - 10 U.S.C. § 311 (2012)

§311. Militia: composition and classes

(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.

(b) The classes of the militia are—

(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and

(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

(Aug. 10, 1956, ch. 1041, 70A Stat. 14; Pub. L. 85–861, §1(7), Sept. 2, 1958, 72 Stat. 1439; Pub. L. 103–160, div. A, title V, §524(a), Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1656.)

= = = = =

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state

The Amendment refers to the security of a state, not the United States.

Madison, Federalist 46, re the Militia

The only refuge left for those who prophesy the downfall of the State governments is the visionary supposition that the federal government may previously accumulate a military force for the projects of ambition. The reasonings contained in these papers must have been employed to little purpose indeed, if it could be necessary now to disprove the reality of this danger. That the people and the States should, for a sufficient period of time, elect an uninterupted succession of men ready to betray both; that the traitors should, throughout this period, uniformly and systematically pursue some fixed plan for the extension of the military establishment; that the governments and the people of the States should silently and patiently behold the gathering storm, and continue to supply the materials, until it should be prepared to burst on their own heads, must appear to every one more like the incoherent dreams of a delirious jealousy, or the misjudged exaggerations of a counterfeit zeal, than like the sober apprehensions of genuine patriotism. Extravagant as the supposition is, let it however be made. Let a regular army, fully equal to the resources of the country, be formed; and let it be entirely at the devotion of the federal government; still it would not be going too far to say, that the State governments, with the people on their side, would be able to repel the danger. The highest number to which, according to the best computation, a standing army can be carried in any country, does not exceed one hundredth part of the whole number of souls; or one twenty-fifth part of the number able to bear arms. This proportion would not yield, in the United States, an army of more than twenty-five or thirty thousand men. To these would be opposed a militia amounting to near half a million of citizens with arms in their hands, officered by men chosen from among themselves, fighting for their common liberties, and united and conducted by governments possessing their affections and confidence. It may well be doubted, whether a militia thus circumstanced could ever be conquered by such a proportion of regular troops. Those who are best acquainted with the last successful resistance of this country against the British arms, will be most inclined to deny the possibility of it. Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. And it is not certain, that with this aid alone they would not be able to shake off their yokes. But were the people to possess the additional advantages of local governments chosen by themselves, who could collect the national will and direct the national force, and of officers appointed out of the militia, by these governments, and attached both to them and to the militia, it may be affirmed with the greatest assurance, that the throne of every tyranny in Europe would be speedily overturned in spite of the legions which surround it. Let us not insult the free and gallant citizens of America with the suspicion, that they would be less able to defend the rights of which they would be in actual possession, than the debased subjects of arbitrary power would be to rescue theirs from the hands of their oppressors. Let us rather no longer insult them with the supposition that they can ever reduce themselves to the necessity of making the experiment, by a blind and tame submission to the long train of insidious measures which must precede and produce it.

nolu chan  posted on  2015-10-05   23:39:20 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#19. To: nolu chan, misterwhite, Y'ALL (#18)

Madison, Federalist 46, re the Militia

The only refuge left for those who prophesy the downfall of the State governments is the visionary supposition that the federal government may previously accumulate a military force for the projects of ambition. The reasonings contained in these papers must have been employed to little purpose indeed, if it could be necessary now to disprove the reality of this danger.

That the people and the States should, for a sufficient period of time, elect an uninterupted succession of men ready to betray both; that the traitors should, throughout this period, uniformly and systematically pursue some fixed plan for the extension of the military establishment; that the governments and the people of the States should silently and patiently behold the gathering storm, and continue to supply the materials, until it should be prepared to burst on their own heads, must appear to every one more like the incoherent dreams of a delirious jealousy, or the misjudged exaggerations of a counterfeit zeal, than like the sober apprehensions of genuine patriotism.

Extravagant as the supposition is, let it however be made. Let a regular army, fully equal to the resources of the country, be formed; and let it be entirely at the devotion of the federal government; still it would not be going too far to say, that the State governments, with the people on their side, would be able to repel the danger.

Madison was prescient, as we are presently living those "incoherent dreams", wherein "the people and the States should, for a sufficient period of time, elect an uninterupted succession of men ready to betray both"...

Thus we see the need for a citizen's militia.

-- Misterwhite? - Where do you stand?

tpaine  posted on  2015-10-06   0:41:06 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#20. To: tpaine, TooConservative (#19)

wherein "the people and the States should, for a sufficient period of time, elect an uninterupted succession of men ready to betray both"...

You are getting to sound as optimistic about our future as I am.

SOSO  posted on  2015-10-06   0:49:26 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#21. To: SOSO (#20)

You are getting to sound as optimistic about our future as I am.

I lost a lot of optimism back in Nov,'63, when the only democrat I ever voted for was killed by a magic bullet.

tpaine  posted on  2015-10-06   0:56:52 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#22. To: tpaine (#21)

I lost a lot of optimism back in Nov,'63, when the only democrat I ever voted for was killed by a magic bullet.

Good God, you actually voted for JFK. Wow!!! That explains a lot.

SOSO  posted on  2015-10-06   0:59:40 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#23. To: SOSO (#22)

Good God, you actually voted for JFK. Wow!!! That explains a lot.

Today JFK and his platform would be classed as being to the right of most of the Republican candidates.

tpaine  posted on  2015-10-06   1:07:11 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#24. To: tpaine (#23)

Today JFK and his platform would be classed as being to the right of most of the Republican candidates.

JFK, like his scumbag brother Ted, was a huge bleeding heart tax and spend libtard. There is no Kennedy that sits to the right of our RINO's we have today. Even our undocumented republicans of today are more right than that scumbag family (for the exception of McStain). Anyone that over taxes my wallet to make them feel better... deserves a magic bullet or cancer to the brainbox.

GrandIsland  posted on  2015-10-06   7:08:40 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#25. To: GrandIsland, tpaine (#24)

JFK, like his scumbag brother Ted, was a huge bleeding heart tax and spend libtard.

Your insanity continues.

Poor schmuck.

JFK, A Conservative by Today’s Standards

Unlike many of his fellow alumni from Harvard, especially our current president, JFK understood economics. Shortly after he was sworn in, the President said, “Lower rates of taxation will stimulate economic activity and so raise the levels of personal and corporate income as to yield within a few years an increased — not a reduced — flow of revenues to the federal government.” He was the first supply-side president, and understood that the key to economic growth is to free up capital for private investment that creates jobs, makes and sells things, and increases the standard of living for the entire country. After all, he had history on his side, and it had worked for nearly 200 years.

“Our tax system still siphons out of the private economy too large a share of personal and business purchasing power and reduces the incentive for risk, investment and effort — thereby aborting our recoveries and stifling our national growth rate,” he said.

And on another occasion, “It is a paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high today and tax revenues are too low and the soundest way to raise the revenues in the long run is to cut the rates now… And the reason is that only full employment can balance the budget, and tax reduction can pave the way to that employment. The purpose of cutting taxes now is not to incur a budget deficit, but to achieve the more prosperous, expanding economy, which can bring a budget surplus.”

JFKs tax cuts were passed posthumously in February, 1964. The result of those significant tax cuts, which still didn’t go as far as he wanted them to go, had dramatic effects on the economy. Real GDP grew at 5.8% in 1964, 6.5% in 1965, and 6.6% in 1966, while the unemployment rate declined from 5.2% in 1964 to 3.8% in 1966, falling all the way to 3.5% in 1969. And, as predicted by our first supply-side president, tax revenues increased dramatically, from $94 billion in 1961 to $153 billion in 1968.

He not only understood real-world economics, but he understood the proper role of government in a free society, as America was founded to be. He said to the New York Economic Club in December, the year before he died, “The federal government’s most useful role is not to rush into a program of excessive increases in public expenditures, but to expand the incentives and opportunities for private expenditures.”

In other words, foster a climate that is conducive to economic growth, rather than creating government programs – expenditures, as he referred to them – which siphon the lifeblood out of a free economy. JFK was a Reaganite, economically speaking, before Reaganites even existed.

****

Modern Democrats Would View John F. Kennedy As A Reaganite Extremist

Deckard  posted on  2015-10-06   8:04:21 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#26. To: Deckard (#25)

You might wanna read this article, libturd

"The Myth of JFK as Supply Side Tax Cutter"

GrandIsland  posted on  2015-10-06   8:38:15 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#27. To: GrandIsland (#26)

"The Myth of JFK as Supply Side Tax Cutter"

I already posted documented facts.

Deckard  posted on  2015-10-06   8:59:23 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#37. To: Deckard (#27)

The only thing you documented is your love for a Democrat.

GrandIsland  posted on  2015-10-06   15:20:16 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#38. To: GrandIsland (#37)

The only thing you documented is your love for a Democrat.

And the only thing you documented on this thread is your love for a communitarian, -- misterwhite..

Feel proud.

tpaine  posted on  2015-10-06   16:22:56 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#39. To: tpaine (#38)

And the only thing you documented on this thread is your love for a communitarian, -- misterwhite..

WTF does White have to do with anything I said?

GrandIsland  posted on  2015-10-06   21:29:55 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 39.

#40. To: GrandIsland (#39)

Every time White gets in trouble, you show up to create a diversion. - And as usual, it hasn't worked.

White can't explain this position, can you? --

www.freerepublic.com/focu...c/907467/posts?page=48#48

"You believe that the rights of the individual reign supreme (as long as they do not violate the rights of others). I believe the rights of the individual need to be tempered with the overall good of society in mind." --- misterwhite/robertpaulsen

tpaine  posted on  2015-10-07 12:45:22 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 39.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com