Welcome! Sign in to access your account. New user?
ADULT: OFF HOME DIRECTORY SEARCH RANDOM POLL MAKE A POLL

User: Mr. Liam

2009-12-22
19
33
1

Polls Created

9 more polls ...

Messages

Click through to message forum for reply and admin options.

"Sticks and stones" DO Kill. A classic example is the Biblical St. Stephan, (Book of Acts) who was "stoned" to death by an angry mob. I've also heard of an infant who was sufficated to death by a babysitter, using the child's own Teddy Bear. At present, I haven't heard of anyone advocating the implementation of "stone control" or the banning of Teddy Bears.

The right to keep and bare arms also comes with the responsability of the owner to keep it unloaded and securely stored when not in use and, when carried, that the owner uses it safely and responsably.

It is unfortunate that not all who possess firearms understand this fact, I wish that they did. Also, there are some who have weapons who shouldn't. But trying to ban firearms is like trying to hold jello in your hands, the more you squeeze, the more it will slip through your fingers. Like it or not, guns are here to stay. If there is anyone who wants a gun bad enough, they'll get it.

FINALLY DAZO, you are getting to the point that I've been trying to convey. Basically dealing with the legal turm; "THE DOCTRINE OF ORIGINAL INTENT." This is a term that you have put a spin on, side-stepped or simply chosen to ignore. I will concede to you the fact that America in 1781 and America today are radically differant. In 1781, there were no police forces, there were no military reserves, National Guard, or even a standing army, (they all went home once the Revolution had ended).

The Doctrine of Original Intent seeks to answer the question; Why did the Authors of THE "Bill of Rights" consider it so important to create this Amendment? It is based upon Original Intent that I believe that My definition of a Militia is correct, even though you disagree, (it's a "Free Country," (for now), and it's your right). Since there was, at that time, no standing army, etc, the Authors believed then that a Millitia WAS considered to be"necessary for the security of a free state." The model of a militia that they chose was the militia at Lexington and Concord.

Question #1 asked "What is a Militia?" to which greater than 1 in 4 didn't know. Question #2 asked the question that you are refering to; "is there a need for a militia in today's America?" The majority of those who responded said yes.

Dazo, I must say that I enjoyed reading your responces. Let us continue to "AGREE TO DISAGREE."

Dazo, I find your definition of "Militia" as laughable. If you do not believe my definition is correct, LOOK IT UP YOURSELF. In Wikipedia, "Militia" is definded as; "The entire able-bodied population of a community, town, county, or state, available to be called to arms." That was the original definition that the Founding Fathers who wrote the Bill of Rights used, any other contemporary definition would be taken out of context.

On April 18th, 1775, Paul Revere was a member of a Militia. On that same day, those Patriots defending Lexington and Concord were ALL members of a local Militia that faught againts the British Regular Army. It's in the history books, I'm not making any of this up. It is from this militia in Massachusetts that the Authors of the Bill of Rights established a Milita's LEGAL definition, all others, especially contemporary definitions do not apply.

In 1781, When the Contitution was drafted, America's largest cities, including Philadelphia, Boston and Charlseton didn't even have an orginized city police force, we would not see them come into existance until around the time of the Civil War. Williamsburg, VA didn't have a police force either, but it did have an armory, where citizens could obtain a rifle, powder and shot if needed.

Yes, the UK restricts who can have a gun, but so did Adolph Hitler and Nazi Germany. Perhaps, that is why the only ones who could hope to assasonate him were in the Army. Ironically, lets look at Switzerland. The Swiss haven't faught a war in over 600 years, yet, not only do they have the right to bare arms, but everyone over the age of 18 is REQUIRED to own at least one.

If you don't believe me, look "Militia" up on Wicapedia, (sp?), or just look it up in a dictionary. In the early days of America. the US Army was small and police forces were virtually non existant. In case of an emergiency, such as an Indian uprising, local folks were called together to sprovide support. Paul Revere was part of a Militia and Militias faught at Lexington and Concord, April 18th, 1775. You can't think of Militias in today's terms. .

"Nudist," Best get your clothes on and go to the refrence columns. The correct answer for a "Well Regulated Militia" is Armed citizens that come together to meet with emergiency. It has nothing to do with "those who are to wear a uniform and a gun." Before you make your remarks, get your facts strate. You're obviously one of the 24 percent taking this poll who doesn't even know what a "Militia" is.