Gramps
Mayor
If, as it says, a militia is one of the main purposes for citizens to keep and bear arms them there's a lot of misinformed people making of it what it isn't.
The NRA, as one example, is not concerned with arming as militia. Their goal to to arm everyone so they might revolt idf things to go to please them, which is the opposite of a militia's purpose.
There again, the millions who do own and keep arms aren't necessaily against arms control as are a radical few who twist the real meaning of the 2nd amendment to suit their fancies.
Taken word for word the meaning is actually quite clear and was proposed at a time when the militias of the revolution played a prominant part in securing the freedoms we enjoy today. It was a time of musket balls and powder horns and a host of calibers which many owners had to cast their own ammo for because availability for any certain size wasn't a given as it is today.
BUT, what I see occuring is a festering movement that is anti-government by a limited number of gun activists who insist on keeping and bearing weapons that they mistakingly believe make them a match for auhority should an occasion arise where they'd decided to challenge that auhority and I say to them, "don't make me laugh".
Given their goals we would evolve into an armed camp on a nationwide basis and no one would be safe from gun-toting kooks. Now they want to sponsor gun glaases for teachers. Are you kidding me? Back in the days of yore teach might've slapped a pupils's hands with a ruler, or worse yet, sent them to sit on a stool in the corner wearing a dunce camp, but that hardly compares to teach with a six-shooter strapping to their hip and saying, "sit down and shut up or you'll know what's good for you" to unruly students who tax their nerves simply because guns change moods considerably.
I wonder, through the years, how many interpretations of the 2nd amendment have been handed down by courts when, truth be told, the wording of the 2nd is quite clear. And, I for one, get weary of hearing these wanna-bes daring the government to "pry" their guns from a "dead hand that grips them". Right there you have it; a 'dead hand' which means to deal was comsumated to a just conclusion.
If you really want to bear arms in the interest of your nation the recruiting stations will gladly review your talents and if you pass muster you, too, can become a hero BUT you don't need to take you weapons along. They will provide them along with a course of training on not only the proficiency of weapons but give you a hunting license to kill people in the pursuit of your duties.
Have you ever killed anyone?
Gramps
The NRA, as one example, is not concerned with arming as militia. Their goal to to arm everyone so they might revolt idf things to go to please them, which is the opposite of a militia's purpose.
There again, the millions who do own and keep arms aren't necessaily against arms control as are a radical few who twist the real meaning of the 2nd amendment to suit their fancies.
Taken word for word the meaning is actually quite clear and was proposed at a time when the militias of the revolution played a prominant part in securing the freedoms we enjoy today. It was a time of musket balls and powder horns and a host of calibers which many owners had to cast their own ammo for because availability for any certain size wasn't a given as it is today.
BUT, what I see occuring is a festering movement that is anti-government by a limited number of gun activists who insist on keeping and bearing weapons that they mistakingly believe make them a match for auhority should an occasion arise where they'd decided to challenge that auhority and I say to them, "don't make me laugh".
Given their goals we would evolve into an armed camp on a nationwide basis and no one would be safe from gun-toting kooks. Now they want to sponsor gun glaases for teachers. Are you kidding me? Back in the days of yore teach might've slapped a pupils's hands with a ruler, or worse yet, sent them to sit on a stool in the corner wearing a dunce camp, but that hardly compares to teach with a six-shooter strapping to their hip and saying, "sit down and shut up or you'll know what's good for you" to unruly students who tax their nerves simply because guns change moods considerably.
I wonder, through the years, how many interpretations of the 2nd amendment have been handed down by courts when, truth be told, the wording of the 2nd is quite clear. And, I for one, get weary of hearing these wanna-bes daring the government to "pry" their guns from a "dead hand that grips them". Right there you have it; a 'dead hand' which means to deal was comsumated to a just conclusion.
If you really want to bear arms in the interest of your nation the recruiting stations will gladly review your talents and if you pass muster you, too, can become a hero BUT you don't need to take you weapons along. They will provide them along with a course of training on not only the proficiency of weapons but give you a hunting license to kill people in the pursuit of your duties.
Have you ever killed anyone?
Gramps
