Well/pol/, what do you take this to mean? Concentrate on 1. Well regulated, 2. Militia, 3. The people. Let's be clear headed about this.
Certainly didn't write the right to shitpost into the constitution.
>>73105582
SHALL
>>73105811
NOT
>>73105582
Im in one and the US Military treats us like fucking garbage they throw fits and bitch and complain when we go to their bases and wouldn't even let us buy tobacco on their bases
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/311
>>73106313
KANGZ
>>73105968
You're in a militia? Can you tell more. Funding? Arms? Structure? Training? Rights of access/movement? Jurisdictional boundaries?
>>73106313
INFRINGED
>>73105582
No infringement on individuals having weapons.
Whatever weapons they want.
Fuck off, slave.
>>73105582
Who defines what is a well regulated militia? The government? The people? No one?
What makes you think that regular gunowners wouldnt be considered a militia?
>>73106535
>Who defines what is a well regulated militia? The government? The people? No one?
>What makes you think that regular gunowners wouldnt be considered a militia?
SHALL!!!
>>73106471
None of those matter. You cant define what is a militia and what isnt. Basically every linked legal gunowner is part of a militia if they claim to be
>>73106535
>>73106666
Finnbro, see >>73106234
All able bodied citizens, used to be men but thanks to the 14th amendment that changed, are apart of the militia.
This goes back to a tradition of American Military history where settlements would conduct raids on hostile indians.
>>73106666
Pls ignore this i misread your message
>>73105582
>well-regulated
high-functioning
>militia
a group of citizens armed and organized against a threat, may be independent of government
>people
all citizens, both as a collective and as each individual. the group to which the right is granted. the amendment does not grant rights to the militia
>>73105582
Part of the issue is that when they wrote the 2nd amendment they had no idea what kind of destructive power weapons of today vs weapons back then would have had because to them it really didn't progress all that much up until that point they had at best cannons and delayed guns. Then there comes to disconnect of the power a militia would have vs the budget of the us army.
>>73105582
The prefatory clause does not limit the effect of the operative clause and state militia system is currently regulated under the Dick Act of 1908.
>>73106471
Yeah I'm in my states militia thats protected in our constitution so they can't disband us like other states.
>funding
We do it for free, only paid when deployed
>structure
The structure is really fucking shitty but I decided to stay and stick it out.
>training
We just got back from a anual US Army base training and it was okay. We meet once a month for drill and have to take FEMA courses
>arms
They took those away after Katrina because some jack ass showed up drunk as hell with an automatic weapon. I bought my own weapons because of this
>rights
Not as much as the US service men, we are treated like retards
>boundaries
This is my Governors choice, not the Feds. We can't be drafted too which is nice because most of us hate the Fed
>>73106380
kekek
>>73105582
There being a need to eat bananas, no man's mouth should be sewn shut.
Does that mean men may only eat bananas?
>>73105968
The reputation of "militia" is embarrassing. Ive never seen militia when i was in the army buying smokes or anything. Did you wear the same uniform pattern as them? If yes you deserve it you fucking sperg
>>73107368
We call it a militia, it basically is.
We wear the standard ACUs with our state flag not the US flag, that we have to buy ourselves
>>73105582
Because a militia is necessary, the people should have the right to keep and bear arms. This establishes several things.
First, the militia is not a federal military. It comprised of the people using arms and ammunition that is available to the people at all times.
The right to keep and bear arms is for the sake of operating in a militia. It is not for hunting or self-defense.
This also means that military arms are certainly the ones protected by it, making an AWB unconstitutional. This was also implied by US vs Miller, where the US Supreme Court ruled that because a short barreled shotgun was not in common military use, it was not protected by the 2nd amendment. The obvious corollary to that is that a weapon in common military use would be protected by the 2nd amendment.
>>73105582
The founders clarified their meaning many times after writing it. Feel free to look it up. The militia is the whole people, well regulated means well equipped.
>>73105582
In Washington's writings, he defined and understood "well regulated" to mean a well equipped and disciplined force, ready at a moment notice to defend the state they lived in. This is important to understand as the Founders did not believe that a large standing army was a good thing to have.
The militia was and is to be composed of all white males aged 18-46, who are to come from all facets of society and provide their own armament, hence the need to protect the right to bear arms, so that the people, who constitute the militia, can be mustered and man it. Read a book anon.
>>73105582
This has already been decided. The militia is every able-bodied male. Non-discrimination means that the militia now = everybody. Well-regulated means that laws exist about guns (ie, I can't buy a gun legally without being of legal age, etc.)
>>73106905
They also didn't know that the US would have nukes. Maybe then they wouldn't have created the Federal Gov't at all?
>>73107762
This post's second point is completely inaccurate, disregard.
>>73107867
Yeah I basically included that in what I said, they really had no idea that humans would eventually have the potential power to blow the entire planet up multiple times over. But we can't fault them for that of course, why they put the amendment process in there because they knew shit would have to evolve.
>>73107644
Did George Washington know about the jews?
>>73107500
At least in a way to distinguish yourselves from regular army. AZ regulates ATACS as their uniform. What state are you?
>>73106666
So does that qualify as well regulated? Or is 'well regulated' beyond definition?
>>73105582
Synonym for in working order.
>>73110287
Well regulated just means functioning.
http://www.constitution.org/cons/wellregu.htm
And that part is irrelevant to the right itself. It's merely an addendum to say that it is necessary.
It's "The right of the people", not "the right of the well regulated militia".
So you can't weasel out of it that way.
>>73107059
Thank for the reply. So who pays for your uniforms, equipment, facilities, if any?
>>73105582
Already been in and through the court. Rights are for the people, who can create a militia (meaning every able bodied man over 16) with or without government consent.
>>73107103
You tell me
You cant regulate militia? I'm an ex-warlord. Trust me.
>>73111463
I'm not weaseling. Just asking.
>>73112726
RARE FLAG
A
R
E
F
L
A
G
>>73107059
>We do it for free
>>73112726
>im the captain now
GET FUCKED, COMMIE!
>>73105582
It's not what we take it to mean... the congress explained it when they wrote it... it took a months of debating exactly how it would be worded.
Militia = THE PEOPLE of the USA.. not the federal army, and not state or local police... THE PEOPLE of the USA are the militia, and they explained it.
They also explained that not only is it a right to be armed, but the the people of the USA "MUST" be armed to have enough power to overthrow a tyrannical government. They debated for 3 months to add the word "must".
So whether you like guns or not.. it is your duty to buy a fully automatic weapon even though it is illegal, and keep it in your house. And as long as you don't use it to shoot an intruder or take it outside, they can't come in and take it from you. It's your constitutional right. It's to overthrow a tyrannical government and protect the other amendments.
>>73113898
ARRR!!
>>73105582
The militia pre-exists the constitution and is composed of the body of the people, it's everyone. "Well regulated" means a militia that isn't run like dog shit. Militias had a bad rap for being disorganized and full of untrained hooligans, so they expressed well regulated as an ideal.
It's not the be confused with the organized militia that congress organizes and arms, which is a select militia of able bodied white males. And even if it did, equal protection and due process would crush that.
The people is everyone. Right of the people refers to a pre-existing individual right, it does not grant that right, it only enumerates it. This usage is consistent with the god damned english langauge and the 1st and 4th amendments.
Everyone should read SCOTUS's ruling on DC vs Heller, Justice Scalia totally dismantles and decimates the argument that the 2nd amendment only guarantees a collective right to weapons in service of a militia. The left is grasping at straws, cherry picking text, and stretching the meaning of text to bullshit as hard as they can.
>>73105582
>>73105811
>>73105928
>>73106313
>>73106471
>>73106380
>>73117006
MAO TOOK THE GUNS.
It means gun production and sales better keep chugging along for the free populace in order to have a fighting chance against the corrupt, cuck world that the founding fathers fought tooth and nail to get the hell away from.
The 2nd Amendment is literally the only thing keeping the US alive.
>>73114660
I would actually argue against having a fully automatic weapon. Unless you intend to engage in squad level suppression fire, all you should really have (and all you need) is a semi-auto.
I actually have a theory that if they made it mandatory for all weapons to be fully automatic, we would have fewer deaths from mass murders. Almost everyone, even people with modest training, would end up wasting all their ammo and hardly hitting a damn thing.
People really misunderstand the purpose and practical use of automatic weapons.
>>73106905
>Part of the issue is that when they wrote the 2nd amendment they had no idea what kind of destructive power weapons of today vs weapons back then would have had because to them it really didn't progress all that much up until that point they had at best cannons and delayed guns.
Thomas jefferson outfitted the lewis and clark expedition with this rifle
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Girandoni_air_rifle
Held 20 shots, could shoot 30 in succession, and shot barely slower than a bolt action. There were also predecessors to the revolver and Gatling guns. They knew shit was going high capacity and high speed. And they knew if we had a problem with it, we could amend the constitution.
>>73108130
It still serves its purpose perfectly
If the majority of the population is willing to fight to overthrow the government and reboot it, the state does not stand a chance, even if most of the military did not defect
>>73117006
It has to be reiterated whenever this is brought up:
There is no way to be basically literate in the relevant history and still be confused about any of this without lying.
George Mason said the militia was the people.
The Founders were intimately familiar with the English tradition of the yeomanry and of how universal armament kept the Glorious Revolution bloodless in their living memory.
The notion of redundant state armies that keep their weapons in a centralized armory was brought up multiple times in the Framing and was soundly rejected every single time.
There just isn't any ambiguity at all.
>>73108701
Yeah, he chose the word 'people' with that in mind to exclude them.
>>73107648
Any book suggestions?
>>73117635
and, like modern day tanks, predator drones, and gatling guns, they were only used by expeditionary forces.
>>73105582
You don't get it bogan.
The government never said what we could and couldn't do. They put in wiring that all of our rights were GIVEN and also outlined what they themselves couldn't do. The people regulate the militias because we are the militia. It never had to be a specific size or follow any other specific guidelines. Do you see a list of rules regarding militia anywhere else in the constitution? I sure didn't.
>flag
>>73117249
STALIN TOOK THE GUNS.
>>73105582
Read the god damn federalist papers shitpostastan.
>>73117373
This, full auto is expensive and useless, you don't need it. Noguns fetishize it just like they think a pistol grip is the end of the world.
>>73106471
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia_(United_States)
>The reserve militia[3] are part of the unorganized militia defined by the Militia Act of 1903 as consisting of every able-bodied man of at least 17 and under 45 years of age who is not a member of the National Guard or Naval Militia.
Recently they opened the draft to women, so EVERY US citizen that can hold a gun between the ages of 17-45 are the militia.
>>73118919
Austrian army used it
>>73119048
>Do you see a list of rules regarding militia anywhere else in the constitution? I sure didn't.
Actually there is, but that's the organized militias, not the militia the 2nd amendment refers to
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_One_of_the_United_States_Constitution
Just Ctrl+F and type militia
>>73106905
What about the First Amendment vis-a-vis blogs and what not overtaking the established news? Or just modern technology that they couldn't have imagined in their time?
Should freedom of speech and of the press be limited to pamphlets printed on period appropriate printing presses?
>>73118919
>>73117635
>1500 pumps to 800 psi
>750~ fps 13mm~ projectile
>30 shots on a charge
>soldiers issued 100 projectiles and 3 air cans
>lethal to 125 yards
That's fucking space age holy shit.
If the founders wanted to limit the weaponry in use by the people, they would have specified some limit in range, power, rate of fire, etc.
>>73119156
How does any of that make me wrong. I made no assertions. My questions were intended for clarification. Maybe I should have gone to /his/, where there are far fewer autists.
>>73120963
why do you think that post was directed specifically at you
>>73105582
Fuck off aussie
>>73106905
>Part of the issue is that when they wrote the 2nd amendment they had no idea what kind of destructive power weapons of today vs weapons back then would have had because to them it really
they knew
>>73105582
>A sell regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state,
This is a statement, stating that a well armed people are necessary for security of the nation.
>the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
This is why I say "people" above and not a military. "The right of the people to keep (own) and bear (carry) arms" can't get any more clear.
I also did remove 2 commas to make it easier to understand. Overuse of commas is common in the founding documents, as it was the writing style of the time. There's like 10 in the first amendment, that doesn't mean free speech should be limited to the military.
>>73107059
Can't be drafted? So in the event of a world war, all we would need to do is say "nope not going im joining a militia" and we'd be cool?
THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE
>THE RIGHT
>THE PEOPLE
SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED
>>73120963
Was he supposed to erase the YOU ARE WRONG part of the image just for you? It's posted for explanatory value, sheesh
>>73105582
>>73105582
The comma indicates that the right to bear arms belongs to the people, not to the militia. The founders understood the militia to consist of all able-bodied adult men in the event of a crisis.
>>73107368
At least the fatboys running around playing pretend soldier didn't lose 2 wars in under 10 years with people who recreationally sodomize goats.
>>73107648
The truth is, crypto-fascists and even most liberals know this, they just don't care.
>>73124026
>implying those aren't the same thing
If you're in America and not in a militia you need to get the fuck out.
>>73123729
If it is not the right of the militia, then the militia and its members must not be allowed to bear arms.
>>73105582
It's not about the start...but the end.
>...,the right of the people to keep and bare arms shall not be infringed
That's all besides the point. I don't need a piece of paper to know that. I already know it and it doesn't matter what they legislate. It's already buried in the subconscious of america....the piece of paper is not there for the person who wants a gun...simply there to remind those that want to take them.
>>73122580
What's stupid is the "well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state", and "the right of the people to keep and bear arms" started out as two separate thoughts in state legislation and proposals that proceeded the second amendment, with different choices of words. Yet leftists want you to read it as:
"A well regulated militia, ... , shall not be infringed."
Which makes less grammatical and logical sense. THEN they have the gall to accuse the right of ignoring the regulated militia clause, when in fact, the left blatantly ignores "the right of the people to keep and bear arms". I can't think of another issue where the left is more dishonest. History and the english language is not ideological and the case is so cut and dry there's little room for opinion.
>>73110287
Regulated is a word which has accrued new meanings since the founders day. This is why it can seem an odd word to occur there, even mysterious, today. However it's clear from books and papers of the time how it was used then.
>>73124995
wrong
>>73125679
Excellent. Thank you for the answer.
>>73105582
They meant militia, not people. The guns will be taken away.
>>73124599
Where did you guys go? I miss 2003
>Um why are we invading iraq? Saddam has nothing to do with bin laden, al queda, or 9/11. Where are the WMDs?
IF YOU DONT LIKE AMERICA YOU CAN GET THE HELL OUT
>2016
>Fuck this white racist hitler country. We're getting socialism and sharia law, and turning this place into honorary mexico so the oppression will finally end. COME ON, It's 2016!
*tumble weed*
>>73105582
Well regulated doesn't mean to have regulations applied.
>>73126574
The last big thing the militia did was take over that reserve in oregon or whatever. Then when their idiot leader got captured they all caved and went home.
Pathetic really. We have militias that don't believe in what they are standing for, and will quit when the going gets tough.
They should be appearing in courts as support, defending businesses from riots, feeding the poor and all that shit. They simply arent thinking big enough. The militias should have entered the business world and started putting real funding behind their views instead of playing army man in the desert.
>>73119949
To be fair, the fellow on the right doesn't necessarily say "give us your guns" but it's more like "don't use them against us."
The one on the right wants to abolish guns in the hands of citizens completely.
>>73126574
There's a difference in being in defence of your country and your people and supporting invading another country.
If you're not willing to defend the country in a time of war with a potential invasion or insurrective response on our soil then why are you even here?
>>73107500
Why ACU? Do you live in a gravel pit? Why not woodland or desert MARPAT?
>tfw AZs militia disbanded because they felt disrespected.
Bunch of faggots. Disrespect comes with the territory. What if the entire US army disbanded every time a liberal said mean things about them? Weak.
