Such diversity.
open carry
- Thread starter seeley booth
- Start date
Such diversity.
CharlesMorrison
Banned
You have only proved one thing. That gun grabbers like you and your insignificant other, are truly and without question, delusional.
The very fact that an individual, with your limited mental capacity, actually is "proud" of behaving like an utter and obvious tool is astounding!
You and your wife(?) Are the product of ignorance.
Link Removed
Fallschirmjäger
New member
I suspect it's not gonna work out quite the way you picture it.
Now that you're a known troll, I doubt anyone is going to expend any effort in debating you. I know that the only think I'll post in any and every thread you participate in is a reminder that you're only here to troll and to recommend that others not engage you. There is no point in it as you're not here for debate nor for education, you're only here for schoolyard level trolling.
shazbot
maybejim
Maybejim
Interestingly, none of the laws you support have been shown to reduce crime or violence. They clearly don't even keep criminals or mental cases from having and bearing arms. They just punish law abiding citizens.
CharlesMorrison
Banned
Yeah. They turned out to be a bunch of panty wearing douchebags!
I am embarrassed to have family still in Ma.
There is nothing left of the great city that was once a participant in our war for freedom.
They allowed the "assault weapons" ban to become a PERMANENT fixture!
Boy..... When did you "Massholes" become such a
friggin group of wimps?!
If you can imagine all this you might have a picture of America in 1791
Try to imagine an America where the loudest noises come from nature. Speed is measured in the wind-filled sails of a man-of-war or the gait of fast horse. Industrial technology is dominated by the water wheel. Generations pass without seeing smoke from anything larger than the smoke house. Roads are rough and most people don't travel far unless they are leaving home for good.
The United States has a population of about 4 million, scattered up and down the 13 states. It is overwhelmingly white and largely Protestant and English-speaking. Most people are from the British Isles, the largest number from England. Pennsylvania Germans are one of the few exceptions. They make up a third of their state's population. There are also 700,000 black people in America. About 90 percent of them are slaves. Although slavery is still legal in New York and New Jersey, almost all of the slaves are held in bondage south of Pennsylvania.
The nation's largest city, Philadelphia, is roughly 50,000 strong. But just about everybody else lives on a farm. Even in the larger towns people have kitchen gardens and keep cows and chickens. In the country, your nearest neighbor, even in the most populous states, is a quarter of a mile away. News is something that comes from word of mouth or a battered three-week-old sheet that has seen many hands.
Rural America seems like a foreign country. It is more isolated than is possible to imagine today. Flocks of the now-extinct passenger pigeon fill the sky, a bobcat's scream echoes off a distant hillside and at night unlit country roads seem strangely dark and forbidding. With a good horse on the best of roads you can make 50 miles a day. But wagons or coaches can cover only 12 to 20 miles in the same time. It is three days of hard bumpy riding from Philadelphia to New York.
By necessity rural America in 1791 is a largely self-sufficient society. You grow your own food, make your own clothes, build your own home and craft your own furniture.
There are some things a farmer cannot make for himself. A musket and powder, pots and pans, hoes and other farm implements have to come from a store. But cash is scarce. In a barter system the local store owner trades goods for produce. Unfortunately for farmers, taxes and mortgage payments cannot be made good in vegetables. When pressured for money the result can be violent - as happened in Shays' Rebellion.
Life expectancy in the America of 1791 is about 38 years for a white male. But this is not as bad as it sounds. It is longer than the average life span in England. And most people who survive to 60 will live to see 75. At an average height of 5 feet 8 inches, Americans are tall by European standards. Most eat meat three times a day. It is not uncommon for a farm family to consume a half pound of meat per person, per day.
Most Americans of 1791 have little time to keep track of the burning political issues of the day. White male property holders, and only those with a certain amount of property at that, are allowed to vote or hold public office. And, since polls are difficult to reach, many of those who are eligible to vote don't bother.
Government is by common consent largely left in the hands of a few wealthy folks who have the time and education to worry about such things. Citizens of the young nation defer to their "betters" to make governmental decisions. These members of the community elite dominate the state and local power structure. In this Americans of 1791 are true to their English political roots.
Arms in 1791
Let's look at arms – specifically, guns – as they existed at the time of the ratification.
Guns in 1791 WOULD
...be made by a gunsmith.
...have rudimentary rifling.
...be single-shot weapons.
...be loadedthrough the muzzle.
...fire by means of a flintlock.
Guns in 1791 WOULD NOT
...haveinterchangeable parts. (Popularized in 1798)
...be revolvers.(Invented in 1835)
...bebreachloaded.(Popularized in 1810)
...use smokeless powder. (Invented in 1885)
...use a percussion cap, necessary for modern cartridged bullets. (Invented in 1842)
...load bullets from a clip. (Invented in 1890)
The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution reads: "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."
The Second Amendment was adopted on December 15, 1791, as part of the first ten amendments contained in the Bill of Rights.
Article III, Section 2: US Constitution: The judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The judges, both of the supreme and inferior courts, shall hold their offices during good behaviour, and shall, at stated times, receive for their services, a compensation, which shall not be diminished during their continuance in office.
The framers of the Constitution designed the U.S. government so that each branch had a check on the others. In this way, no one branch would have absolute authority. Judicial review is the main way the Supreme Court can check the legislative branch's power. If a case before the court raises a constitutional question, the justices may decide a law violates the Constitution.
In United States v. Cruikshank (1876), the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that, "The right to bear arms is not granted by the Constitution; neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence" and limited the applicability of the Second Amendment to the federal government.
In Presser v Illinois, 116 U.S. 252, 265 (1886), the Court reiterated that the Second Amendment “is a limitation only upon the power of Congress and the National government, and not upon that of the States.” Although most of the rights in the Bill of Rights have been selectively incorporated into the rights guaranteed by the fourteen amendment and thus cannot be impaired by state governments, the Second Amendment has never been so incorporated.
In Miller v. Texas, 153 U.S. 535 (1894), Franklin Miller was convicted and sentenced to be executed for shooting a police officer to death with an illegally carried handgun in violation of Texas law. Miller sought to have his conviction overturned, claiming his Second Amendment rights were violated and that the Bill of Rights should be applied to state law. The Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment did not apply to state laws such as the Texas law: "As the proceedings were conducted under the ordinary forms of criminal prosecutions there certainly was no denial of due process of law."
In Robertson v. Baldwin, 165 U.S. 275 (1897), the Court stated in dicta that laws regulating concealed arms did not infringe upon the right to keep and bear arms and thus were not a violation of the Second Amendment:
In United States v. Miller(1939), the Supreme Court ruled that the federal government and the states could limit any weapon types not having a “reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia”.
In District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), the Supreme Court ruled the Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. Pp. 2–53. Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose. Pp.54-56.
Try to imagine an America where the loudest noises come from nature. Speed is measured in the wind-filled sails of a man-of-war or the gait of fast horse. Industrial technology is dominated by the water wheel. Generations pass without seeing smoke from anything larger than the smoke house. Roads are rough and most people don't travel far unless they are leaving home for good.
The United States has a population of about 4 million, scattered up and down the 13 states. It is overwhelmingly white and largely Protestant and English-speaking. Most people are from the British Isles, the largest number from England. Pennsylvania Germans are one of the few exceptions. They make up a third of their state's population. There are also 700,000 black people in America. About 90 percent of them are slaves. Although slavery is still legal in New York and New Jersey, almost all of the slaves are held in bondage south of Pennsylvania.
The nation's largest city, Philadelphia, is roughly 50,000 strong. But just about everybody else lives on a farm. Even in the larger towns people have kitchen gardens and keep cows and chickens. In the country, your nearest neighbor, even in the most populous states, is a quarter of a mile away. News is something that comes from word of mouth or a battered three-week-old sheet that has seen many hands.
Rural America seems like a foreign country. It is more isolated than is possible to imagine today. Flocks of the now-extinct passenger pigeon fill the sky, a bobcat's scream echoes off a distant hillside and at night unlit country roads seem strangely dark and forbidding. With a good horse on the best of roads you can make 50 miles a day. But wagons or coaches can cover only 12 to 20 miles in the same time. It is three days of hard bumpy riding from Philadelphia to New York.
By necessity rural America in 1791 is a largely self-sufficient society. You grow your own food, make your own clothes, build your own home and craft your own furniture.
There are some things a farmer cannot make for himself. A musket and powder, pots and pans, hoes and other farm implements have to come from a store. But cash is scarce. In a barter system the local store owner trades goods for produce. Unfortunately for farmers, taxes and mortgage payments cannot be made good in vegetables. When pressured for money the result can be violent - as happened in Shays' Rebellion.
Life expectancy in the America of 1791 is about 38 years for a white male. But this is not as bad as it sounds. It is longer than the average life span in England. And most people who survive to 60 will live to see 75. At an average height of 5 feet 8 inches, Americans are tall by European standards. Most eat meat three times a day. It is not uncommon for a farm family to consume a half pound of meat per person, per day.
Most Americans of 1791 have little time to keep track of the burning political issues of the day. White male property holders, and only those with a certain amount of property at that, are allowed to vote or hold public office. And, since polls are difficult to reach, many of those who are eligible to vote don't bother.
Government is by common consent largely left in the hands of a few wealthy folks who have the time and education to worry about such things. Citizens of the young nation defer to their "betters" to make governmental decisions. These members of the community elite dominate the state and local power structure. In this Americans of 1791 are true to their English political roots.
Arms in 1791
Let's look at arms – specifically, guns – as they existed at the time of the ratification.
Guns in 1791 WOULD
...be made by a gunsmith.
...have rudimentary rifling.
...be single-shot weapons.
...be loadedthrough the muzzle.
...fire by means of a flintlock.
Guns in 1791 WOULD NOT
...haveinterchangeable parts. (Popularized in 1798)
...be revolvers.(Invented in 1835)
...bebreachloaded.(Popularized in 1810)
...use smokeless powder. (Invented in 1885)
...use a percussion cap, necessary for modern cartridged bullets. (Invented in 1842)
...load bullets from a clip. (Invented in 1890)
The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution reads: "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."
The Second Amendment was adopted on December 15, 1791, as part of the first ten amendments contained in the Bill of Rights.
Article III, Section 2: US Constitution: The judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The judges, both of the supreme and inferior courts, shall hold their offices during good behaviour, and shall, at stated times, receive for their services, a compensation, which shall not be diminished during their continuance in office.
The framers of the Constitution designed the U.S. government so that each branch had a check on the others. In this way, no one branch would have absolute authority. Judicial review is the main way the Supreme Court can check the legislative branch's power. If a case before the court raises a constitutional question, the justices may decide a law violates the Constitution.
In United States v. Cruikshank (1876), the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that, "The right to bear arms is not granted by the Constitution; neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence" and limited the applicability of the Second Amendment to the federal government.
In Presser v Illinois, 116 U.S. 252, 265 (1886), the Court reiterated that the Second Amendment “is a limitation only upon the power of Congress and the National government, and not upon that of the States.” Although most of the rights in the Bill of Rights have been selectively incorporated into the rights guaranteed by the fourteen amendment and thus cannot be impaired by state governments, the Second Amendment has never been so incorporated.
In Miller v. Texas, 153 U.S. 535 (1894), Franklin Miller was convicted and sentenced to be executed for shooting a police officer to death with an illegally carried handgun in violation of Texas law. Miller sought to have his conviction overturned, claiming his Second Amendment rights were violated and that the Bill of Rights should be applied to state law. The Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment did not apply to state laws such as the Texas law: "As the proceedings were conducted under the ordinary forms of criminal prosecutions there certainly was no denial of due process of law."
In Robertson v. Baldwin, 165 U.S. 275 (1897), the Court stated in dicta that laws regulating concealed arms did not infringe upon the right to keep and bear arms and thus were not a violation of the Second Amendment:
In United States v. Miller(1939), the Supreme Court ruled that the federal government and the states could limit any weapon types not having a “reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia”.
In District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), the Supreme Court ruled the Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. Pp. 2–53. Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose. Pp.54-56.
Fallschirmjäger
New member
You've already admitted that you are here to do nothing except cause controversy. No one who cares about this forum is going to engage you in conversation.
B
Bikenut
Guest
If one is going to use the argument (or the implication) that exercising the right to keep and bear arms only applies to the arms available at the time the Bill of Rights was adopted then it is logical to apply that reasoning to all the other rights mentioned in the B.O.R. also. To do less would be a transparently hypocritical attempt to push a personal agenda.
In 1791 the right to free speech existed and was exercised by word of mouth, letters, and newspapers.... yet email, TV news, and cell phones were not even thought about but we have them now so shouldn't there be background checks, mandatory training, and permits required to use the internet, watch TV, and keep and bear cell phones?
Oh... and there would be quite the uproar if there was such a thing as a background check, mandatory training, and a permit required before people are .. allowed... to pontificate about how other people have it all wrong. Imagine all the progressive liberals that would be instantly silenced.... or would they suddenly declare the only way to get their cell phone would be to take it from their cold dead hand?
In 1791 the right to free speech existed and was exercised by word of mouth, letters, and newspapers.... yet email, TV news, and cell phones were not even thought about but we have them now so shouldn't there be background checks, mandatory training, and permits required to use the internet, watch TV, and keep and bear cell phones?
Oh... and there would be quite the uproar if there was such a thing as a background check, mandatory training, and a permit required before people are .. allowed... to pontificate about how other people have it all wrong. Imagine all the progressive liberals that would be instantly silenced.... or would they suddenly declare the only way to get their cell phone would be to take it from their cold dead hand?
My post was just showing the same constitution that gives us the right to bare arms also gave the right to the supreme to make rulings on cases where constitutional rights are in question. My post was not anti-gun nor pro-gun. I wanted to leave opinions out of it. As far as the revolvers go, that was just a copy/paste from a website that came up when I googled "arms of 1791". Write the author a letter if you don't like their research. This was not to start a debate. I just had a response to Navy's post. I had to research and read for a few days. I thought he was right till I realized his post was just a copy/paste from a website that actually argued both sides of the "well regulated" controversy. The website he copy/paste from had compelling facts supporting both sides of the debate. Turns out he only posted the parts that supported his opinion.
No training, permits or taxes is mentioned in the ruling of DOC v Heller. It was the ruling of Miller V Texas that gives the right of each state to "arm their militia as the state sees fit for the states ability to protect themselves. My conclusion is that the U.S. Constitution and the 2nd Amendment is not protected under the 14th Amendment therefore each state is allowed to make restrictions and laws regarding its citizens right to bare arms without infringing on its citizens right to bare arms. Any law that the citizens feel is unjust will have its final ruling in the Supreme Court if protested. It is the voters not the government that vote to pass these stupid laws and restrictions. It is not the government infringing on our rights, it's our own friends, families and neighbors who vote to pass unjust and unnecessary laws.
MHas,
You are lying troll. Want proof?
And here we are, 22 of your posts after you made your claim....
If only you could have kept your word.....
You are lying troll. Want proof?
And here we are, 22 of your posts after you made your claim....
If only you could have kept your word.....
Believe me I had no intention on posting here again. I was sick of saying the same thing over and over and you guyswould have all sorts of responses but no response had anything to do with what I was talking about. You guys just come up with really good arguments with what seem to be facts on other issues. From my first post you guys have changed the whole way I view our "natural rights" and the gun laws imposed on us. I apologize I learned from you guys and had new thoughts and feeling because of the arguments and information you guys have brought to my attention. Maybe if you guys spent more time explaining our natural rights to this nations voters, instead of childish name calling and trying to belittle everyone that doesn't share your "opinion", we wouldn't have such unjust laws and restrictions.
Instead of sitting here complaining about the laws, if you guys feel so strongly that it infringes on your 2nd amendment rights, go out with your guns and break the law you feel is unjust, get arrested and bring it to the Supreme Court. Posting NRA quotes and pictures of cartoon characters is not going to solve anything. If anything, it's those actions that make you seem uneducated. Get out there, get arrested and prove to the courts you know what you're talking about.
Patrick Henry Society
As you read this, there is a group of patriots in Washington who are standing up. On February 7th, they will stand for a third time in as many months against unjust laws meant to strip them of their right to defense. In fact, on the 7th they will stand against a state legislature that has said the people are not allowed to openly carry a firearm while viewing the proceedings of their own government. Think about that. The very people we elected, do not want their armed constituents to watch them at work, to see the things they do and say. The real question is what are they doing that they have to be afraid of the people?
These patriots will be arrested on the 7th, because some of them will choose while there to defy the unjust and tyrannical laws being forced on them. What awful thing will they be doing? Walking into a public gallery with a rifle slung over their shoulder. They are not monsters, or crazy gun nuts. They are Americans like you, who love their families and go to work and pay bills. They are Americans who value liberty more than anything else.
tcox4freedom
New member
MHas,
I'm not sure you do get it. The RIGHT of "freedom" and the rights we have to insure our freedom have nothing to do with "Natural Rights". (After all nature is determined by the "survival of the fittest".
Man's right to freedom is a GOD Given RIGHT! (The highest authority in the universe! The sovereign & supreme authority throughout all eternity!)
I remain firmly convinced that some people just can't grasp that TRUTH!
If we as a society can not accept the TRUTH of a supreme being with supreme authority, then rest assured there will always be evil men rising through the ranks of tyranny; trying to take those rights of freedom away for us.
Survival in the natural world being what it is - "survival of the fittest" - will always be one of destruction and bondage for those that are weaker. (It's the best nature can do.)
But, when one recognizes certain rights as given of GOD (the "creator" of nature and all things), then one can truly understand why our 2nd Amendment Freedom should not be compromised.
-
I'm not sure you do get it. The RIGHT of "freedom" and the rights we have to insure our freedom have nothing to do with "Natural Rights". (After all nature is determined by the "survival of the fittest".
Man's right to freedom is a GOD Given RIGHT! (The highest authority in the universe! The sovereign & supreme authority throughout all eternity!)
I remain firmly convinced that some people just can't grasp that TRUTH!
If we as a society can not accept the TRUTH of a supreme being with supreme authority, then rest assured there will always be evil men rising through the ranks of tyranny; trying to take those rights of freedom away for us.
Survival in the natural world being what it is - "survival of the fittest" - will always be one of destruction and bondage for those that are weaker. (It's the best nature can do.)
But, when one recognizes certain rights as given of GOD (the "creator" of nature and all things), then one can truly understand why our 2nd Amendment Freedom should not be compromised.
-
Not much at all. You don't need to argue with me. I agree with you. It's the damn voters not the "government" that did this. The constitution made it possible for the voters, not the government, to pass these laws.
Fallschirmjäger
New member
Why are we still engaging this cretin?
