If they wanta play games I say we play - Page 2

goldshellback · July 6th, 2008, 01:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by grady

Militias? Hey, we have militias in Missouri. Quite a few, according to the local police.

However... one small, er, big problem for me: I'm not sure I'm eligible. Um, er, you see, some of them have a pigment/family heritage/gotta-hate-all-foreigners requirement, and... um... well, I'm not sure some of the rural militias would appreciate my family's heritage or my input on the matter.

Hey, I could start my own! Yeh, that's it.

I'd be in yours. Sign me up!

gddyup · July 6th, 2008, 01:22 AM

I think Scalia got it right, in as far as could be done under the auspices of the limits of the case set before the court. It's not everything that the Pro-2nd crowd would have liked, me being a member of such, but I feel it was a decent decision based on what the justices had to work with.

5-4 is not what I or many others had expected, but it's a heck of a lot better than 5-4 in favor of the opposite.

As far as the militia, you don't have to get into one per se, we're all for the most part already in the miltia....

Tubby45 · July 6th, 2008, 01:34 AM

My understanding of it was that the 5/4 was whether the DC ban was unconstitutional and it was a 9/0 that the 2A was an individual right.

Kerbouchard · July 6th, 2008, 01:40 AM

Unfortunately, as it turns out, the government has a different name for those local 'militias'. I believe they normally call them cults. So far, forming militias doesn't seem to have worked out well for the militia-men.

CURMUDGEON5 · July 6th, 2008, 02:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tubby45

My understanding of it was that the 5/4 was whether the DC ban was unconstitutional and it was a 9/0 that the 2A was an individual right.

Now that interpretation I REALLY like. If that's accurate, the four dissenting judges have been partially redeemed in my judgement. (That's one of the problems with legalese; interpretation.) The Navajo code talkers drove the Japanese military crazy during WW2.

stanislaskasava · July 6th, 2008, 02:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tubby45

My understanding of it was that the 5/4 was whether the DC ban was unconstitutional and it was a 9/0 that the 2A was an individual right.

The dissenting opinion does admit that the 2A is an 'individual right' but they misinterpret the right until it is meaningless:

Quote:

The question presented by this case is not whether the Second Amendment protects a “collective right” or an “individual right.” Surely it protects a right that can be enforced by individuals. But a conclusion that the Second Amendment protects an individual right does not tell us anything about the scope of that right.

Quote:

...
Specifically, there is no indication that the Framers of the Amendment intended to enshrine the common-law right of self-defense in the Constitution.

Quote:

...
And, for these reasons as well as the independently sufficient reasons set forth by JUSTICE STEVENS, I would find the District’s measure consistent with the Second Amendment’s demands.

I don't even think militia membership would be sufficient to keep and bear arms if you ask these clowns.

BAC · July 7th, 2008, 07:00 PM

Erm, most of us are already in the militia, in case some forgot...

-B

mcp1810 · July 7th, 2008, 07:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kerbouchard

Unfortunately, as it turns out, the government has a different name for those local 'militias'. I believe they normally call them cults. So far, forming militias doesn't seem to have worked out well for the militia-men.

No, they call them gangs. Cult is a term reserved for churches here in Texas!

Kerbouchard · July 7th, 2008, 07:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mcp1810

No, they call them gangs. Cult is a term reserved for churches here in Texas!

Tomatoes, Tomatoes...

Well, it works better when I say it out loud...*shrug*

dukalmighty · July 7th, 2008, 08:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kerbouchard

Tomatoes, Tomatoes...

Well, it works better when I say it out loud...*shrug*

Tomatoes,tomatos

July 6th, 2008, 01:22 AM	#12
gddyup Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Derry, NH Posts: 896	I think Scalia got it right, in as far as could be done under the auspices of the limits of the case set before the court. It's not everything that the Pro-2nd crowd would have liked, me being a member of such, but I feel it was a decent decision based on what the justices had to work with. 5-4 is not what I or many others had expected, but it's a heck of a lot better than 5-4 in favor of the opposite. As far as the militia, you don't have to get into one per se, we're all for the most part already in the miltia.... __________________ Firefighter/EMT My own piece of the web... The Right of Defense It is better to be the widow of a hero than the wife of a coward. - Dolores Ibarruri

July 6th, 2008, 01:34 AM	#13
Tubby45 Distinguished Member Join Date: May 2005 Location: In the reloading room Posts: 1,988	My understanding of it was that the 5/4 was whether the DC ban was unconstitutional and it was a 9/0 that the 2A was an individual right. __________________ Freakshow Manufacturing LLC "You can kill it. We can help." 07 FFL/ 02 SOT

July 6th, 2008, 01:40 AM	#14
Kerbouchard VIP Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Texas Posts: 2,531	Unfortunately, as it turns out, the government has a different name for those local 'militias'. I believe they normally call them cults. So far, forming militias doesn't seem to have worked out well for the militia-men. __________________ Money can be lost or stolen, health and strength may fail, but what you have committed to your mind is yours forever. http://miscmusings.townhall.com/ Who is John Galt?

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

July 7th, 2008, 07:00 PM	#17
BAC Distinguished Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Tampa, Florida Posts: 1,279	Erm, most of us are already in the militia, in case some forgot... -B