Senate fails the country again.

[Humerox]

Originally Posted by feanan [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I'd assume during any civil war, the military would probably be split. So, hopefully both sides will have tanks and helos.

I doubt a lot of military people would have the stomach to start killing their fellow americans.

but some civilians seem to be OK with shooting US Army troops I guess. cuz that's who'd be representing the govment.

[Barkingturtle]

Originally Posted by Nihilist_santa [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

So in other words you have no real rebuttal except for ad hominem attacks among the other employed logical fallacies in your post? The Government cant even handle Afghanistan you think they can handle 100+ million armed citizens? Not just enemies but friends and family. Try not to be so myopic.

Bitch please. I don't rebut the cognitively dissonant--I ridicule.


Seriously though, maybe we should drop armed civilians into Afghanistan and let them have a shot at it. You know, since the military you so fear and despise has been so utterly inept.

[Black Jesus]

Originally Posted by Humerox [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

So the Quran would be OK next to it? Or is it just your religion that's allowed?

The 10 commandments are Islamic. Also let's not make assumptions pertaining to my religion.

Originally Posted by Humerox [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Eight different forms of the 2nd Amendment were ratified by the states. No one had a clue what they were ratifying and everyone is still arguing about it today.

Some states prohibit militias. Like California. And I hope you aren't suggesting that the various citizen militias are in any way organized, coordinated, or able to effectively ban together to defeat an attack from a tyrannical government.

Besides. We don't need no organimization. Merica!

It doesn't matter what the states ratified, what matters is what Jefferson put into the constitution, with his pen strokes guided by the power of Jesus.

CA does have militias, they just disguise themselves as bowling clubs. Actually some don't even go that far. I'm surprised it hasn't been challenged more in the courts actually.

[Humerox]

Originally Posted by Black Jesus [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The 10 commandments are Islamic. Also let's not make assumptions pertaining to my religion.

I didn't. You inferred Christianity, did u not? Christmas trees (new testament) and 10 commandments? If you'd been talking Hanukkah I'd have figured Jadaism. But the pen strokes of Jesus...

Originally Posted by Black Jesus [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

It doesn't matter what the states ratified, what matters is what Jefferson put into the constitution, with his pen strokes guided by the power of Jesus.

which brings us back to what he meant about separation of church and state. he's the one that explained it...then you brought courts and stuffz up. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Originally Posted by Black Jesus [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

CA does have militias, they just disguise themselves as bowling clubs. Actually some don't even go that far. I'm surprised it hasn't been challenged more in the courts actually.

Me too tbh. But the point stands about none of them being what the framers had in mind about militias.

Let me here call your attention to that part which gives the Congress power "to provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the militia, and for governing such a part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States -- reserving to the states, respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress." By this, sir, you see that their control over our last and best defense is unlimited. If they neglect or refuse to discipline or arm our militia, they will be useless: the states can do neither -- this power being exclusively given to Congress. The power of appointing officers over men not disciplines or armed is ridiculous; so that this pretended little remains of power left to the states may, at the pleasure of Congress, be rendered nugatory. . . . Will the oppressor let go of the oppressed? Can the annal of mankind exhibit one single example where rulers overcharged with power willingly let go of the oppressed, though solicited and requested most earnestly? The application for amendments will therefore be fruitless. Sometimes the oppressed have got loose by one of those bloody struggles that desolate a country; but a willing relinquishment of power is one of those things which human nature never was, nor ever will be, capable of.

[Humerox]

Originally Posted by Barkingturtle [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Seriously though, maybe we should drop armed civilians into Afghanistan and let them have a shot at it. You know, since the military you so fear and despise has been so utterly inept.

ooooh let's...maybe then we wouldn't hear so much bullshit

[Black Jesus]

Originally Posted by Humerox [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I didn't. You inferred Christianity, did u not? Christmas trees (new testament) and 10 commandments? If you'd been talking Hanukkah I'd have figured Jadaism. But the pen strokes of Jesus...

Messianic Judaism

Originally Posted by Humerox [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Me too tbh. But the point stands about none of them being what the framers had in mind about militias.

Let me here call your attention to that part which gives the Congress power "to provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the militia, and for governing such a part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States -- reserving to the states, respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress." By this, sir, you see that their control over our last and best defense is unlimited. If they neglect or refuse to discipline or arm our militia, they will be useless: the states can do neither -- this power being exclusively given to Congress. The power of appointing officers over men not disciplines or armed is ridiculous; so that this pretended little remains of power left to the states may, at the pleasure of Congress, be rendered nugatory. . . . Will the oppressor let go of the oppressed? Can the annal of mankind exhibit one single example where rulers overcharged with power willingly let go of the oppressed, though solicited and requested most earnestly? The application for amendments will therefore be fruitless. Sometimes the oppressed have got loose by one of those bloody struggles that desolate a country; but a willing relinquishment of power is one of those things which human nature never was, nor ever will be, capable of.

One interesting note about the Bill of Rights is they weren't included at first because they were just kind of de facto. Common knowledge at the time. Their addition was seen as superfluous. Gun ownership by citizens, freedom of religion, etc. were just a given and no big deal in the era.

[Nihilist_santa]

Originally Posted by Barkingturtle [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Bitch please. I don't rebut the cognitively dissonant--I ridicule.


Seriously though, maybe we should drop armed civilians into Afghanistan and let them have a shot at it. You know, since the military you so fear and despise has been so utterly inept.

Your lack of rebuttal has already been noted, no need to reinforce the notion. Stop living in a world of generalizations and sterotypes. "rednecks" are not the only people who own guns. What do you think happens to soldiers when they are done serving? They just forget everything they knew? Btw those armed civilians have already been dropped into Afghanistan through mercenary groups and organizations like Blackwater or whatever they are called now.

[Ahldagor]

Originally Posted by Black Jesus [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

my pursuit of happiness includes the right to bear bazookas

easy to get as is, but not very practical. they're tough to lug around and way outta date in technology terms. you could own a Gatling gun from civil war era or later, and the gov. wouldn't really care because they've much better fire arms than the public will ever get in terms of current technology. finding enough bears to keep your ammunition supplied could be more hazardous than the actual weapon.

[Barkingturtle]

Originally Posted by Nihilist_santa [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Your lack of rebuttal has already been noted, no need to reinforce the notion. Stop living in a world of generalizations and sterotypes. "rednecks" are not the only people who own guns. What do you think happens to soldiers when they are done serving? They just forget everything they knew?

I never said any such thing--you're projecting your own self-loathing and attaching it to my very witty deconstruction of everything you believe in.

Originally Posted by Nihilist_santa [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Btw those armed civilians have already been dropped into Afghanistan through mercenary groups and organizations like Blackwater or whatever they are called now.

Oh shit. This does not bode well for our nation, then, if the Afghans have managed to conquer not only our military but also our privately contracted civilian mercenaries. What makes them so much better than us? Is it Allah? I bet it's Allah.