Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

I'm quite well versed in the history of the militia Paul. I'm just confused why you think a patchwork of laws that make it difficult to own/possess firearms makes any sense towards making the militia more capable.

Let's look at your home state.

What state gun laws work toward the efficacy of the Militia? Is efficacy of the militia even your objective?

If you were governor, what laws would you work to implement, change, rescind in order to make your ideal of the militia more workable?

How would you make the state laws more in tune to your ideal of the 2nd amendment?

  • Replies 1.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Posted (edited)

I'm quite well versed in the history of the militia Paul. I'm just confused why you think a patchwork of laws that make it difficult to own/possess firearms makes any sense towards making the militia more capable.

 

Let's look at your home state.

 

What state gun laws work toward the efficacy of the Militia? Is efficacy of the militia even your objective?

 

If you were governor, what laws would you work to implement, change, rescind in order to make your ideal of the militia more workable?

 

How would you make the state laws more in tune to your ideal of the 2nd amendment?

 

 

Knowing Mass like we all do, I think its hilarious that they chose a Minuteman with a musket as the design for the state Quarter. :P

Edited by Mike Steele
Posted

Avoiding Authoritarian control was the reason the militia was created.

 

But you keep accenting "well regulated" which my guess is a lot more "regulated" than most "moderate conservatives" would think wise or historically accurate, and that's the way to avoid "authoritarian control"?

Posted (edited)

The "well regulated" in the 2nd Amendment is understood to mean "well organized and trained" in the parlance of the time. I'm surprised those who consider themselves familiar with the 2nd Amendment not knowing this.

 

The point being that its not an unorganized group of individuals...but a trained and organized body, working under the authority of the State Governor, (and NOT the federal government) for times of national emergency.

 

Having a "well regulated" militia meant you would have less need for a standing army.

 

The purpose of the 2nd Amendment was to protect States Rights by protecting an individual right. Today it has been "evolved" to just be an individual right, with none of the larger responsibility or authority associated with it.

Edited by Paul G.
Posted

Yeah, I'm still trying to figure out how the guy from Massachusetts can claim that the scope of regulations up there have any remote function towards making the Massachusetts militia more effective and finely tuned than the folks out here in Flyover country. Round here, people can actually go practice without having to get permission from the state first, and without threat of arrest for stopping for fuel/food on the way to/from the range.

Sh*t, I can't get a CCW here in MA, despite being a law abiding citizen, simply because I am not personal friends with the chief of police nor blowing him. That's not an exaggeration either, in many areas of Mass those are the only ways to get one.

Posted

Really? I am not friends with any Chief or Police, nor have I blown anyone, and I've had a Class A CCW since the 90's. Perhaps the military ID and membership with a shooting club helps?

 

And I got mine first in Boston.

Posted

The "well regulated" in the 2nd Amendment is understood to mean "well organized and trained" in the parlance of the time. I'm surprised those who consider themselves familiar with the 2nd Amendment not knowing this.

We're ALL quite aware of this Paul.

 

The point being that its not an unorganized group of individuals...but a trained and organized body, working under the authority of the State Governor, (and NOT the federal government) for times of national emergency.

The lack of organization is due to the LACK of effort by state governments to organize training. The extent of this is the CMP.

 

 

The purpose of the 2nd Amendment was to protect States Rights by protecting an individual right. Today it has been "evolved" to just be an individual right, with none of the larger responsibility or authority associated with it.

How does this militia, which has arms of some sort, but which it is prohibited from owning effect this security function?

 

You've YET to address the key issue Paul. The regulations on arms in Massachusetts for example, how do they make the Militia in that state more effective? Can they own AR-15s? Can they own cannons? Can they own Squad weapons?

Posted

Really? I am not friends with any Chief or Police, nor have I blown anyone, and I've had a Class A CCW since the 90's. Perhaps the military ID and membership with a shooting club helps?

 

And I got mine first in Boston.

You're obviously 'the right sort of people' for the issuing agency.

Posted

 

Really? I am not friends with any Chief or Police, nor have I blown anyone, and I've had a Class A CCW since the 90's. Perhaps the military ID and membership with a shooting club helps?

 

And I got mine first in Boston.

You're obviously 'the right sort of people' for the issuing agency.

 

And that surprises you just how? ;)

Posted

Not at all. I'm used to the collective rights crowd and their mealy mouthed advocacy of rampant regulations that do nothing to make an effective militia.

Posted

Really? I am not friends with any Chief or Police, nor have I blown anyone, and I've had a Class A CCW since the 90's. Perhaps the military ID and membership with a shooting club helps?

 

And I got mine first in Boston.

When I first lived here in the early 90's it was a great deal easier out Worcester way, not so much now. To be fair, Cambridge is hardly pro-2nd amendment. . .

Posted

 

 

Really? I am not friends with any Chief or Police, nor have I blown anyone, and I've had a Class A CCW since the 90's. Perhaps the military ID and membership with a shooting club helps?

 

And I got mine first in Boston.

When I first lived here in the early 90's it was a great deal easier out Worcester way, not so much now. To be fair, Cambridge is hardly pro-2nd amendment. . .

They don't call it the "people's republic" for nothing.

Posted

 

The Office of the Director of Civilian Marksmanship (DCM) was created by the U.S. Congress as part of the 1903 War Department Appropriations Act. The original purpose was to provide civilians an opportunity to learn and practice marksmanship skills so they would be skilled marksmen if later called on to serve in the U.S. military.

Posted

Yeah, but the DCM became the CMP, and is still on essentially that same mission.

Posted

"This week, in TLAs..."

Posted

If that presumed gunman had only 1% of what it takes to be a gunman, there should have been more shots shot, and more victims than a lone floorboard.

 

False flags, false flags everywhere (when MSM is reporting, of course).

Posted

Yeah, but the DCM became the CMP, and is still on essentially that same mission.

 

Yeah, like a 69 Boss 302 is essentially the same as a 78 Mustang 2. I experienced the changeover 1st hand. I'll see if I can post pictures to demonstrate the difference. S/F.....Ken M

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...