Derby FALs
Member In Memoriam
Screw US vs Miller. It is just an opinion of six men, long dead. Letting the SCOTUS have the final say is like "putting speed freaks in charge of the pharmacy."
Bartholomew Roberts
Quote:
"Bartholemew - not being a militia does not mean one has lost the right to keep and bear arms, see?"
Did anyone here make that argument? I know that I did not and Jeff White did not.
Quote:
"And on top of that the notion of the militia as an exclusive club is extremely questionable."
Nobody said it is an exclusive club. They said it is subordinate to democratically elected governments instead of being a private organization of local boys with guns.
By a strict reading of the Constitution, such a law issued by the national gov't would be unconstitutional, unless enacted to cover federal property. The national gov't has no police powers beyond that property.
You have me thoroughly confused. I don't understand what your position is against, so could you elaborate what it is in the affirmative?
But not if they have a cannon?From what I know they have not harmed or threatend anyone in our community and as long as they leave me and mine alone I have no problem what they do out there.
I suspect that the members of the "Militia of Washington County, Arkansas" might disagree with that assessment. For some reason, I can't see those Arkansas rednecks running around the woods with the intent to demonize the word "militia" or gain sympathy for the anti-gun-rights agenda.All this labeling of these groups as "militias" is nothing more than an attempt to besmirch what the real militia is.
Bartholomew Roberts
Lucky, I wouldn't know how to elaborate it any more succinctly than I already have.
"There is also nothing in the constitution to prevent the government from forbidding or otherwise regulating the private formation of armed groups."
This doesn't matter. Congress has not been granted the power to forbid the formation of private armed groups. Congress only has specific powers granted to it in the Constitution. Forbidding the formation of armed private groups is not among those powers."There is also nothing in the constitution to prevent the government from forbidding or otherwise regulating the private formation of armed groups."
Lucky said:A man is arrested for owning firearms he 'shouldn't'. People argue he has a right to own them, because of the 2nd amendment. You argue he doesn't, because he's not in a real militia.
Only certain people may join a militia under strict rules, but it's not exclusive.
It's to oppose the Feds, except when it's working for the feds.
You are stating an opinion as fact.he had no right to form a private militia.
Molon Labe said:You are confusing facts with opinions.
You should restate the above as follows:
"It is my opinion he had no right to form a private militia."