"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State...

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Americans. If you're going to keep quoting this as a reason to keep your firearm, have you joined a well regulated militia? Because any idiot buying a rifle at Walmart doesn't constitute a well regulated militia in my mind. That's an armed, untrained mob.

What, exactly, would be the problem with a requisite for owning a gun license be membership in a militia (perhaps unless you prove you use it for hunting or something), which can actually train people how to use them one weekend out of the month or something and perhaps better weed out psychopaths and incompetents. To me this seems far, far less egregious than the current situation. You keep your guns, you actually learn how to defend yourself, and there's some ongoing process wherein people can detect signs of a nutcase. And if a weekend a month is too much to ask, maybe you don't need that gun as much as you think you do.

Other urls found in this thread:

law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/311
kutv.com/news/local/tooele-county-man-indicted-for-trying-to-blow-up-blm-facility-in-arizona
youtu.be/jnMvKM1MSI4?t=170
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/311

>10 U.S. Code § 311 - Militia: composition and classes

>(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States

Now fuck off, leaf.

Frankly, your opinion doesn't fucking matter. I get to have my gun. So do other law-abiding citizens.

It doesn't say "the right of the Militia." It says "the right of the people."

Shut the fuck up and go back to fucking moose.

No need to get so defensive, I'm asking a question not attacking you. Frankly you guys can gun each other down all you like, it just shocks me that the people who in one breath say "we need to defend ourselves from an oppressive government! We need to defend ourselves from home invasion!" can't be assed to actually go and train with their community once a month or something.

And in answer to the first poster - is that basically saying "bam you turned 17 you're part of the militia you don't actually have to do anything"? Because I've never once in my life heard of anybody have to attend any form of militia training. That doesn't feel like a well regulated militia to me either, that sounds like a shitty blanket technicality.

Nobody cares one bit what is sounds like to you. The Congress defined our militia. The Supreme Court says we have the individual right to keep and bear arms. What some effeminate left-wing Canadian thinks is simply irrelevant. We kicked you fuckers out in 1776 for a reason.

Canada, you should know better than the questions a burger's MUH GUNS. Did you expect an intelligent discussion with gunnuts?

Heres your answer leaf

If we ever need a militia, waiting to acquire firearms until needed is too late.

The well regulated part means when activated. The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed so that the body of the militia are already armed when needed

...

>What some effeminate left-wing Canadian thinks is simply irrelevant.

kek, yeah yeah literally communists etc.

What, exactly, is wrong with the idea of actually doing something with a militia? Why is having a gun so important to you if the very concept of being part of an organization that defends your community brings you to a frothing fury?

I guess not. Personally I'm not even against owning firearms, I just considered that militia membership (and actual training) was beneficial both for actually making sure people could use the weapons they own responsibly and also conforming to the usual rhetoric for gun ownership (defending yourself).

It turns out it triggered a bunch of people anyway.

pic related you commie fucks

>in my mind.
Not an argument.

Do you understand what a republic is, you moron?

>What, exactly, is wrong with the idea of actually doing something with a militia?
Nothing.

>Why is having a gun so important to you if the very concept of being part of an organization that defends your community brings you to a frothing fury?
First, he never said that being part of a militia made him mad. Secondly, the having a gun is important because the constitution recognizes it as an inalienable right, and rights are useless if not exercised.

You seem to believe that my constitutional rights are up for debate, or open to compromise. I don't know what gave you that impression, but they are not.

Ok. Do you argue that any armed mob constitutes a well regulated militia, then?

Explain to me, particularly in the concrete relationship between a republic and poorly regulated firearm ownership. I live in a filthy monarchy or possibly communist dystopia depending on who you ask.

Furthermore, can anyone explain to me why the well regulated militia was mentioned in the same sentence? Would not the right to bear arms and the right to a well regulated militia be separate if there's this distinction? It strikes me as a confusing way to phrase it unless they're directly related to one another.

>You seem to believe that my constitutional rights are up for debate, or open to compromise.

Can't you already be restricted from firearm ownership if you're a criminal / insane? Is that not already a compromise?

I love how all you marxist commie faggots ignore this

Her, try and understand this as far as what our 2nd amendment means

I'm not a communist, I'm supposed to be a monarchist, remember? Either way yes I hate freedom etc, let's get over that.

Sorry if your shitty image macro doesn't constitute an actual discussion - but ok we can get into it. Presumably "well balanced breakfast" stands in for "militia" and food stands in for firearms? I understand the argument, but what exactly is the problem with ensuring people have a well balanced breakfast, as they say? Why is suggesting that so offensive to you that you have to start pulling out the "dirty commies" rhetoric? Please stop being so defensive, I'm asking questions, not trying to steal your guns. It's not like I can, and it's not like me asking a bunch of people on Sup Forums is going to influence anyone with the power to. Rather than feel so threatened, it's better to have a damn dialogue about it.

>I cannot read
We know OP

People on Sup Forums recently have the reading comprehension of 7th graders.
>Once I leave college and go to an uncucked state(cali-fag here) I plan on joining a militia. Well regulated was definitely put into the 2a for a reason. It means that we not only have the right, but the responsibility to arm ourselves and train to be able to overthrow the government if needed.

I know you gun haters won't respond to my posts. I just wish I knew how much you hate getting you arguments beat the fuck out once people understand what the second amendment is really about. You fucking commie haters all eat shit.

>Can't you already be restricted from firearm ownership if you're a criminal / insane
1 it's only done through due process
2 any laws restricting the possession and ownership of any type of arms without conviction of an individual through due process is unconstitutional
3 people charged with a crime should only have their Rights legally denied during the sentence and immediately restored once their sentence is up

My state law forbids me from joining a militia, even though I am given that right in the constitution.

Fuck me.

You can tell yourself what ever you need to but you are a full on marxist. LOL..."I'm not a coomunist".... whatever faggot.

>leaf
Shall not be infringed. Say it over and over.

What I wonder is how would americans justify their gun ownership without the second amendment?

>i-its my natural right
says literally who? What if you had to move to Canada for a work project or something, do you think "ITS MUH NATURAL RIGHT, LOCKE SAYZ SO" would keep you from getting arrested for waving around a restricted firearm in public?

>leafs in charge of understanding the constitution
>leafs in charge of understanding due process
pottery

See
Also note that I've already disclaimed I don't hate guns and the entire thread is here to propose that you actually just have a system in place where you learn how to use the damn things responsibly.

Anyway because the only way you seem capable of arguing is reposting a shitty image macro of a half-assed analogy I'll carry on your analogy.

So you need food to have a well balanced breakfast, that's great. You are, rather than accepting the premise of the thread that a well balanced breakfast is a good thing and that maybe you should try and have a well balanced breakfast, shitting yourself in anger and going "I CAN EAT 20 CHOCOLATE BARS FOR BREAKFAST IF I WANT THIS IS THE LAND OF THE FREE FUCK OFF COMMIES REEE STOP TRYING TO TAKE AWAY MY BREAKFAST!"

I'm not trying to steal your damn breakfast, friend, I'm asking you why you don't eat a well balanced one if food is so important to you. Get it?

SHALL

...

>Sorry if your shitty image macro doesn't constitute an actual discussion - but ok we can get into it

That macro is perfect. It completely and exactly proves that the right to bear arms is an individual right. Yopu can fuck right off like we told you to fucl off whne we won the revolution and caused you to .ose control over your entire slave empire you fucking fucks,
You are going to get everything you deserve as a nation that enslaved most of the planet...your children are paying now, your women are next. Enjoy karma assholes.

All males DO join a well regulated militia, you dolt.

It's called the Draft.

Also, militia encompasses the whole population of the US anyway so it really does not matter

Except you wouldnt get arrested because guns are legal in canada

They have restrictions. You can't just show up with whatever firearm you want.

The natural right to defend yourself in the same capacity that those who would do you harm oppress you. Why is that so hard for leaves to understand? Saging your shitty slide thread

When the time comes, we'll form in a minute.

we dont have to justify anything. just because youre eternally cucked by a government who refuses to let you protect yourselves, doesnt mean that the right to bear arms isnt one of the most basic human rights. the real question is how would you stop us from owning the guns and the answer is you wouldnt.

They would defend it for the same reason why gamers defend games from the media or how truck owners defend owning a truck after 80 people were ran over.

It's not some object that's the problem, it's fucking people.

As OP I'm not that guy, but again, the premise of the thread was "If you like defending yourself so much why not arrange an organization where you learn to actually do it once a month?"

I'm getting the impression you guys are so used to going through the motions with "you can't take my guns away!" that you don't even read the argument anymore.

>live in community
>own firearms
>be trained in their use.

Congratulations, you're part of the 'militia'

If the second amendment limits Americans to muskets does that mean the First amendment limit Americans to manual one page at a time printing presses?
You stupid Brits gave up you only defense against the muslim invasion ans now you live with sharia law zones and THOUSANDS of your children getting turned into sex slaves. HAHAHAHAHAHA faggots

I am my own well regulated militia.
The regulated militia is constituted/defined as any white landowning male from roughly late teens to 50s.
So yes, let's enforce regulated militia law.
No non-whites, non-land owners (if you own but 1% of land which anyone who has made one payment on a house or piece of property does), and non-males.
I don't doubt that would improve things immensely.

The feds don't let us setup militias any more. Last one I am aware of ended up being 60% FBI agents.

kutv.com/news/local/tooele-county-man-indicted-for-trying-to-blow-up-blm-facility-in-arizona

>the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
THAT COMMA IS NOT IN THE RATIFIED VERSION

THAT COMMA CHANGES THE INDEPENDENT CLAUSE

THAT IS A JEW COMMA PUSHED BY JEWS TO MAKE US THINK IT IS THE RATIFIED VERSION

IT IS NOT

Came here to say that. Thank you user.

The rest of the world can suffer from these attacks. In the USA we can defend ourselves...deal with that shit

Ok. So what seems to be so offensive about a formal arrangement where an individual is trained in their use? That is what I've been asking.

I did take note of the first post in the thread which basically states as soon as you turn 17 you're part of the militia, so on a technical level I get it, but it's strange to me that people are being so diligent in the idea that being a member of the militia should have absolutely zero responsibilities in times of peace. You should be instructed in how to use your guns if you consider it your right to have them, and it'd probably save a lot of people a lot of headaches from legions of incompetent assholes abusing them.

You are saying nothing. You are a gremlin. Begone gremlin.

>bam you're in the militia
Yes…
It was largely influenced by the Anglo-Saxon Fyrd policy…
Which means you own a weapon and you are apart of the militia by default when you come of age.
No service required but you are apart of the militia, doesn't mean much to you I understand, but it's our way of life, please stop judging us.

FPBP

>As OP I'm not that guy, but again, the premise of the thread was "If you like defending yourself so much why not arrange an organization where you learn to actually do it once a month?"
plenty of people already do that. millions more practice individually.

A well regulated doctorate, being necessary to the safety of an abortion clinic, the right of the people to have an abortion, shall not be infringed.

That's argument I make with libs. Teaches them a grammar lesson. Who has the right to an abortion? The people or the doctors.
>inb4 it's different
Yeah the 2a is a constitutional right

read DC v Heller, you inbred cuck

I would say yes.

>Americans. If you're going to keep quoting this as a reason to keep your firearm, have you joined a well regulated militia? Because any idiot buying a rifle at Walmart doesn't constitute a well regulated militia in my mind. That's an armed, untrained mob.

Congratulations you're capable of making arbitrary distinctions between militias and armed citizenry. Spoilers: There is no difference. They are the same thing.

>What, exactly, would be the problem with a requisite for owning a gun license be membership in a militia (perhaps unless you prove you use it for hunting or something), which can actually train people how to use them one weekend out of the month or something and perhaps better weed out psychopaths and incompetents.

Literally everything, because you're establishing a precedent by which the Government can deny issuing the license whenever it likes. You are essentially creating the means by which the peoples' right to keep and bear arms can be infringed.

>To me this seems far, far less egregious than the current situation. You keep your guns, you actually learn how to defend yourself, and there's some ongoing process wherein people can detect signs of a nutcase. And if a weekend a month is too much to ask, maybe you don't need that gun as much as you think you do.

You don't keep your guns if the Government can revoke your ability to own and purchase them at its discretion, which is exactly what you're proposing. It's no wonder your ancestors sucked British cock and still do.

Yea because there literally is no argument that can interfere with a natural right. It is a basic premise of nature. Thats why we reply with:
Shall not be infringed
Get fucked commie
Etc.
The rhetoical arguments that would talk a free man out of his right to defend himself are the same ones that enable the same slavery and racism that modern liberals are so excited to fight. So no I won't entertain your argument, I won't even read it, it's wrong before it even begins.

I have never read US Code: The post.

Damn, FPBP


are canadians really this stupid?

Another question. Why are Americans so anti gun regulation.

Why shouldn't people have to take a gun training course and a psychiatric evaluation before buying a military style rifle?

>Well regulated was definitely put into the 2a for a reason.
yeah, any infringement is a badly regulated free society, no infringements is a well regulated one

Because fuck you.

That's why.

>everyone just keeps responding to the fucking leaf instead of actually looking at the US's codification of English common law

NOT

Yes, and they're generally the ones diligent enough to actually use their guns responsibility. I'm talking about the other dipshits who own a gun "just because" or have some power fantasy of "defending themselves" but never take the time to actually learn how to use a weapon responsibly.

BE

because crime is down yet we have never owned more guns

also your reasoning is "muh feelings"

>If the second amendment limits Americans to muskets does that mean the First amendment limit Americans to manual one page at a time printing presses?
There is a process should one feel like they are put on the list unduly, user.

youtu.be/jnMvKM1MSI4?t=170

Where's the well regulated part

The Federal Government came to the understanding that well over 120,000,000 law abiding citizens owned more that 500,000,000 million weapons and have more ammunition in their homes that the USA, Russia and China has combined.
Disarming Americans is impossible. New York and Connecticut banned specific types of rifles and well over 250,000 Americans said "FUCK YOU , WE WON'T DO WHAT YOU TELL US", NOW WHAT WILL THE GOVERNMENT DO...INCREASE OUR PRISON CELLS BUT 700% TO JAIL THEM.
IT'S OVER, GUN CONTROL HAS BEEN BEAT THE FUCK OUT SO BADLY THAT THEY WON'T EVEN TALK ABOUT IT IN THE MAIN STREAM MEDIA.

In the Bill of Rights.

What's so offensive about it?
Simple it's a barrier that the government can easily control

You already see the damage done through free speech and schools in America
Do you think all these sjws pop up because of their parents? No it's the schools
Effectively youre saying that everyone should have to go to gun school but who runs gun school?

People already train with their guns on their own
There is no need for regulation beyond that
Give me stats on "legions of incompetent assholes" please
You can't I know

NOICE

USA
USA
USA

theres literally nothing wrong with owning firearms solely for self protection or collecting. i would recommend practicing with your self defense firearm but with a shotgun or a carbine, its literally just point and shoot inside a building.

Not an argument

The U.S still has very high gun homicide rates. I know I'd feels safer if some random Muslim couldn't walk in to a store and buy an AK47 and 500 rounds in 5 minutes.

The second amendment was clearly only meant for the police to own guns. We need to kill these gun toting second amendment terrorists.

Go fuck yourself Leaf everyone hate you

Except if you have a mental or criminal record, in which case it's no longer your natural right or basic premise of nature.

Who said I was here to argue with a Canadian on US gun laws?

n-not you too Norway.

ITT OP proves why nobody likes Canadisn posters. They ask a (retarded) question, they get told the answer multiple times in multiple ways, and they ignore it every time because they're too cuckolded by their government to even fathom the concept of inalienable individual rights.

INFRINGED


Wow my posts are underrated

1) Are the any other sources of the regulations of this militia? Since the militia must be "well regulated", according to the 2nd amendment (the amendment you so love)

2) Since the 2nd amendment states that the right of the people to bear arms is for the purpose of being in a well regulated militia (there's literally no other way to parse the sentence), why should Americans carry guns OUTSIDE of their participation in the militia?

I.e. why doesn't the "militia headquarters" or something like that keep all the guns? Then they'll give them out to you when it's needed?

>It says "the right of the people"

Yes and it also says "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State"

The right of the people is only being granted here FOR THE PURPOSE of having a well regulated militia - as I stated above there's literally NO OTHER SENSIBLE WAY of parsing the sentence.

If I say "Vegetables, being necessary for good health, the right of the people to eat broccoli, shall not be infringed", I am saying that the people have a right to broccoli BECAUSE vegetables are good for you.

If militias weren't the reason for granting a right to guns, then why are they mentioned in the amendment at all?

Therefore, what should happen is, as I stated to the other guy, the militia headquarters (and there should be such a thing, since this militia has to be well regulated, according to what the amendment allows) should keep all the guns and hand them out to people when militia activity is undertaken. Because this amendment DOES NOT GRANT ANYBODY THE RIGHT TO USE ARMS, OUTSIDE OF THE CONTEXT OF A MILITIA

GET THAT THROUGH YOUR THICK SKULL

>and they ignore it every time

I've replied to most people arguing with me. It doesn't help that most are ad hominem calling me a communist cuck, and a majority of the rest aren't actually addressing what I asked and instead whining about me trying to take away their guns.

And the majority of those gun homicides happen in strict gun places that have tons of black people. Also, why do non-US western counties only care about Gun homicide, and not any other type?

Look up common usage of the word regulated in the 1700s

more like those sluts you posted are overrated

Am I shadow banned or are the anti gunners just BTFO that bad that they won't respond?

Okay so then citizens have no rights to bear arms in a personal context? They have a right to bear arms within the context of the well regulated militia. Which you say is the Army reserve. The Army should keep all the guns and then just give them out to you when the militia is needed.

The wording of the 2nd amendment does not grant the right of anybody to bear arms outside of the context of a "well regulated militia". It ONLY grants you that right within the context of a well regulated militia. The wording is quite clear.

>defend yourselves Americans
>WOAAAH RELAX ITS JUST A PRANK

Well regulated refers to the maintenance of the firearms that a militia has.

I did. Most of what you've said is brainless shitposting and you ignored my actual rebuttal to the premise of your image macro.

I agree, you're right, etc. Can you fuck off now?

>Let's learn the lessons of old and stop our people being oppressed and killed... by making it easier for citizens to possess weapons to kill, giving companies more power to oppress and having a shit system

Well done, yankee... you fucked yourself up.

>The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males

So women and non binary genders aren't included? sexist tbqhfamalam

If you own a gun you are actually a part of any militia that may crop up as needed.

>membership in militia
newsflash: some of us actually train to use our guns. I don't need some bureaucrat telling me to go target practice on the weekend.

Fuck off leaf. Go drink some maple syrup, eh?

No infact the supreme court ruled that the second amendment does give anyone the right to own a gun. Regardless of the militia.

Its just fun pointing out to you idiots that even if the second amendment said only people in the militia get of have guns that it doesn't matter. Everybody is in the militia anyways.

Also

>The Army should keep all the guns and then just give them out to you when the militia is needed.


You are forgetting the KEEP part.

We really need to remove canada from the internet.

All that goal post shifting.

At least when aussies shit post its usually funny. fuck off trudeau jr.