let them eat lead

All things philosophical, related to belief and / or religions of any and all sorts.
Personal philosophy welcomed.
wesw
Posts: 9646
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2014 1:24 am
Location: the eastern shore

let them eat lead

Post by wesw »

Quotes on the Second Amendment

The Founding Fathers on the Second Amendment

"I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
George Mason
Co-author of the Second Amendment
during Virginia's Convention to Ratify the Constitution, 1788


"A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves …"
Richard Henry Lee
writing in Letters from the Federal Farmer to the Republic, Letter XVIII, May, 1788.


"The people are not to be disarmed of their weapons. They are left in full posession of them."
Zachariah Johnson
Elliot's Debates, vol. 3 "The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution."


"… the people are confirmed by the next article in their right to keep and bear their private arms"
Philadelphia Federal Gazette
June 18, 1789, Pg. 2, Col. 2
Article on the Bill of Rights


"And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the Press, or the rights of Conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms; …"
Samuel Adams
quoted in the Philadelphia Independent Gazetteer, August 20, 1789, "Propositions submitted to the Convention of this State"


The Founding Fathers on Arms

"Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence … from the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable … the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference — they deserve a place of honor with all that's good."
George Washington
First President of the United States


"The supposed quietude of a good man allures the ruffian; while on the other hand arms, like laws, discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as property. The same balance would be preserved were all the world destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay them aside … Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them."
Thomas Paine


"To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them."
Richard Henry Lee
American Statesman, 1788


"The great object is that every man be armed." and "Everyone who is able may have a gun."
Patrick Henry
American Patriot


"Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?"
Patrick Henry
American Patriot


"Those who hammer their guns into plowshares will plow for those who do not."
Thomas Jefferson
Third President of the United States


"The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power is inherent in the people; that … it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; … "
Thomas Jefferson
letter to Justice John Cartwright, June 5, 1824. ME 16:45.


"The best we can help for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed."
Alexander Hamilton
The Federalist Papers at 184-8


The Founding Fathers on Maintaining Freedom

"The greatest danger to American freedom is a government that ignores the Constitution."
Thomas Jefferson
Third President of the United States


"There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters. "
Noah Webster
American Lexicographer


"The people never give up their liberties but under some delusion."
Edmund Burke
British Statesman, 1784


"What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms."
Thomas Jefferson
to James Madison


"They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Ben Franklin
American Statesman


Later Quotes on Gun Control

"The ruling class doesn't care about public safety. Having made it very difficult for States and localities to police themselves, having left ordinary citizens with no choice but to protect themselves as best they can, they now try to take our guns away. In fact they blame us and our guns for crime. This is so wrong that it cannot be an honest mistake."
Malcolm Wallop

User avatar
Econoline
Posts: 9581
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 6:25 pm
Location: DeKalb, Illinois...out amidst the corn, soybeans, and Republicans

Re: let them eat lead

Post by Econoline »

Interesting.

With all that discussion of the meaning of the word "militia", did the Founding Fathers ever give equal concern to the meaning of the words "well regulated"????

Really, I'm curious.
People who are wrong are just as sure they're right as people who are right. The only difference is, they're wrong.
God @The Tweet of God

User avatar
Guinevere
Posts: 8989
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 3:01 pm

Re: let them eat lead

Post by Guinevere »

Not even Antonin Scalia has given it much thought. What he said in the majority opinion he authored in Heller:
Finally, the adjective “well-regulated” implies nothing more than the imposition of proper discipline and training. See Johnson 1619 (“Regulate”: “To adjust by rule or method”); Rawle 121–122; cf. Va. Declaration of Rights §13 (1776), in 7 Thorpe 3812, 3814 (referring to “a well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms”).
Which is rather in contrast to th lengthy analysis he gives other important words and phrases in the second amendment.

I submit its because the concept of regulation is one with which he disagrees - particularly with respect to guns - and so he ducked the issue as only Scalia can (and he tried to bury it, too).

The full opinion is here:https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/07-290.ZO.html
“I ask no favor for my sex. All I ask of our brethren is that they take their feet off our necks.” ~ Ruth Bader Ginsburg, paraphrasing Sarah Moore Grimké

wesw
Posts: 9646
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2014 1:24 am
Location: the eastern shore

Re: let them eat lead

Post by wesw »

you can keep and bear arms and even form a militia if you want to

simple language simple meaning

lawyers (insert eye rolling emoticon here)

User avatar
MajGenl.Meade
Posts: 20817
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 8:51 am
Location: Groot Brakrivier
Contact:

Re: let them eat lead

Post by MajGenl.Meade »

No, you can't form a militia "if you want to".

Historically speaking, all male citizens between the ages of blah and bluh are already liable to be called out as the militia by the State, which regulates the State militia. Further, state militias are subject to Federalization - the national government can call upon the State to provide their militia contribution to act upon the orders of Federal military officers who further "regulate" the militia. It was Lincoln's call for 90-day militia under National control that was the precipitating cause for Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee and Arkansas to secede in 1861

The historical concept of State militia has been subsumed under National Guard, these days although technically, AFAIK, state citizens are still liable to be called as militia should extreme circumstances require it. Hence, the 2nd amendment still has relevance in that area as well as generally speaking.

The so-called militia you speak of are just whacked out weirdo citizens who decide to arrogate to themselves the word "militia" (just as they could call themselves "The Army" or "Rangers" or "Special Forces" if they wished). It has no Constitutional implication whatsoever. They are not the well-regulated militia as spelled out in that document.
For Christianity, by identifying truth with faith, must teach-and, properly understood, does teach-that any interference with the truth is immoral. A Christian with faith has nothing to fear from the facts

wesw
Posts: 9646
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2014 1:24 am
Location: the eastern shore

Re: let them eat lead

Post by wesw »

I am speaking of no specific groups. I am speaking of the founders intent, as is obvious from the above quotes

where is the language that states that the well regulated militia must be an arm of the state?

the citizens may organize independent of the state, in fact an armed citizenry was encouraged to keep the state in check, so i respectfully disagree with you

User avatar
MajGenl.Meade
Posts: 20817
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 8:51 am
Location: Groot Brakrivier
Contact:

Re: let them eat lead

Post by MajGenl.Meade »

You are disagreeing with history, not me, respectfully or otherwise.

The Articles of Confederation, 1781 defined a militia as the Founding Fathers understood it. From Article 6:
No vessel of war shall be kept up in time of peace by any State, except such number only, as shall be deemed necessary by the United States in Congress assembled, for the defense of such State, or its trade; nor shall any body of forces be kept up by any State in time of peace, except such number only, as in the judgement of the United States in Congress assembled, shall be deemed requisite to garrison the forts necessary for the defense of such State; but every State shall always keep up a well-regulated and disciplined militia, sufficiently armed and accoutered, and shall provide and constantly have ready for use, in public stores, a due number of filed pieces and tents, and a proper quantity of arms, ammunition and camp equipage
Understand me well - this does not mean that the Second Amendment applies only to that militia. The pre-Revolutionary War militia was composed of all able-bodied males 45 and below who, in accordance with the British militia acts, were responsible to provide their own firearms. Thus the Constitution protects the rights of citizens to own guns.

Nevertheless, "the militia" never meant anything less than the duty to respond to the call of the State government for defense of the State and nation when necessary. The states were required to provide for the equipage of the militia when called out, including ammunition and weapons which the Founding Fathers understood would be required because not all people owned guns (believe it nor not).
For Christianity, by identifying truth with faith, must teach-and, properly understood, does teach-that any interference with the truth is immoral. A Christian with faith has nothing to fear from the facts

wesw
Posts: 9646
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2014 1:24 am
Location: the eastern shore

Re: let them eat lead

Post by wesw »

"I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
George Mason
Co-author of the Second Amendment
during Virginia's Convention to Ratify the Constitution, 1788


"A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves …"
Richard Henry Lee
writing in Letters from the Federal Farmer to the Republic, Letter XVIII, May, 1788.

Meade, if my fellow townspeople and I , independent of our government, got together at our church and formed a plan of assembly and self defense ii case our town was assaulted by a terror team, we would by definition be a militia and we would be within our rights as citizens and free people.

do you disagree?

wesw
Posts: 9646
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2014 1:24 am
Location: the eastern shore

Re: let them eat lead

Post by wesw »

....also....,

I believe that most states still have a, little publicized , citizen militia, completely separate from the national guard, at least they did in the 80 s

it s been a long while since I read up on the subject, but I know that Maryland had such a militia back then, when it was still the Free State.

perhaps it has been dissolved , now that Maryland has become something else, but perhaps not

eta- I googled and tho they are not completely independent of the national guard, they are under the control of the state govt, not the feds

User avatar
MajGenl.Meade
Posts: 20817
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 8:51 am
Location: Groot Brakrivier
Contact:

Re: let them eat lead

Post by MajGenl.Meade »

(1) you and your townspeople can get together and call yourselves anything you wish (as I already pointed out). It doesn't make you a well-regulated militia as the Founding Fathers understood it - which is your (obviously wrong) claim.

(2) congratulations on believing that most states still have a provision for a citizen militia (as I already pointed out in the comment about National Guard and the continuation of state militia regulation afterward)

(3) well done on understanding that the militia is composed of members of the citizenry (as I already pointed out).
For Christianity, by identifying truth with faith, must teach-and, properly understood, does teach-that any interference with the truth is immoral. A Christian with faith has nothing to fear from the facts

wesw
Posts: 9646
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2014 1:24 am
Location: the eastern shore

Re: let them eat lead

Post by wesw »

ah well, it seems that we are in agreement after all.

I understand your desire to not be seen to be agreeing with the rabble ....

It is enough to know in my heart that you are with us..., but quietly...., quietly.....

know that when I play the song "battle of new Orleans" in future, I will envision you, beside me, trailing the hounds..... :)

wesw
Posts: 9646
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2014 1:24 am
Location: the eastern shore

Re: let them eat lead

Post by wesw »

should be required listening for all elementary students


User avatar
MajGenl.Meade
Posts: 20817
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 8:51 am
Location: Groot Brakrivier
Contact:

Re: let them eat lead

Post by MajGenl.Meade »

What makes you think we agree?
wesw wrote:you can keep and bear arms and even form a militia if you want to simple language simple meaning
lawyers (insert eye rolling emoticon here)
You refer to the language and meaning of the Constitution and you are wrong.

wesw wrote:I am speaking of the founders intent, as is obvious from the above quotes where is the language that states that the well regulated militia must be an arm of the state?
Asked and answered. You are (again) wrong.

Back to the minors with you! AA probably.
For Christianity, by identifying truth with faith, must teach-and, properly understood, does teach-that any interference with the truth is immoral. A Christian with faith has nothing to fear from the facts

wesw
Posts: 9646
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2014 1:24 am
Location: the eastern shore

Re: let them eat lead

Post by wesw »

well, if you agree that my fellow towns people and I can gather, independent of our govt, and form plans to assemble and defend our community, in the case that we are attacked by a terror team...., the rest is just semantics, and I ll leave that to the lawyers..., brother :)

eta-I have no problem with AA ball..., I would rather see a good game in a cozy little AA park anyday...
Last edited by wesw on Wed Dec 09, 2015 2:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
MajGenl.Meade
Posts: 20817
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 8:51 am
Location: Groot Brakrivier
Contact:

Re: let them eat lead

Post by MajGenl.Meade »

You and your friends can form a knitting circle or a circle jerk. It has nothing to do with the Constitution, a well-regulated militia or any of the other nonsense you come out with - and then routinely pretend you never wrote down
For Christianity, by identifying truth with faith, must teach-and, properly understood, does teach-that any interference with the truth is immoral. A Christian with faith has nothing to fear from the facts

wesw
Posts: 9646
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2014 1:24 am
Location: the eastern shore

Re: let them eat lead

Post by wesw »

oh, I have no problem admitting that I mis wrote and was wrong, when it is the case, as it seems to be now. we are all often wrong about things.

(but that thread about Kerry and biden huddling in some dark corner planning a run at the presidency , was intended to be a shot at Clinton from the outset.)

eta- I knew I went too far with that johnny Horton song, but I couldn t resist.

User avatar
MajGenl.Meade
Posts: 20817
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 8:51 am
Location: Groot Brakrivier
Contact:

Re: let them eat lead

Post by MajGenl.Meade »

.... and my recent post about the Cleveland Browns was really intended to be a shot at Walmart's policy of providing free 'flu shots

But I see you admitted being wrong about something that matters much more. There is hope yet.
For Christianity, by identifying truth with faith, must teach-and, properly understood, does teach-that any interference with the truth is immoral. A Christian with faith has nothing to fear from the facts

wesw
Posts: 9646
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2014 1:24 am
Location: the eastern shore

Re: let them eat lead

Post by wesw »

yes, there is always hope, keep working on it and you ll soon be able to do it too.....

User avatar
MajGenl.Meade
Posts: 20817
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 8:51 am
Location: Groot Brakrivier
Contact:

Re: let them eat lead

Post by MajGenl.Meade »

Wrong again, bucko! :lol:
For Christianity, by identifying truth with faith, must teach-and, properly understood, does teach-that any interference with the truth is immoral. A Christian with faith has nothing to fear from the facts

wesw
Posts: 9646
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2014 1:24 am
Location: the eastern shore

Re: let them eat lead

Post by wesw »

:)

Post Reply