Quote:
Originally Posted by Willravel
Alexander Hamilton wrote, in the Federalist Papers, that a well regulated militia referred to both a state of preparedness with rigorous and persistent training. Let's say you take a sample of 100 Americans totally at random. How many of these individuals do you suppose have the training necessary to function in an armed, "fire team" sized group in a military or militia type of situation?
A majority of the US is not in any sense of the phrase well regulated. Why? A majority of Americans do not need any such training in their daily lives. As I said, times change.
|
Those same founders also acknowledged that the militia MAY fall to disarray. Nobody knew what the militial would become after time, but that the right should still be protected in case it didn't. If those 100 people feel they need no such training, then they only have themselves to blame. you say times change, do rights change then? If so, how long til the right to privacy or speedy trial becomes moot?
If you can tell me, with all honesty, that the framers of the constitution knew that their rights could come and go with the changing times and show me absolute proof of this in their writings, then i'll be the first to apologize.
-----Added 9/12/2008 at 04 : 36 : 07-----
Quote:
Originally Posted by shakran
Great! Tell ya what. I do agree that we need to be able to resist the government should it become tyrannical. I'm somewhat surprised that the people loudly extolling this view didn't start shooting at some point over the past 8 years, but let's just pretend they were temporary sheep.
|
I was ready to kill if agents ever attempted to serve me with a warrant based on the patriot act, were you?
Quote:
Originally Posted by shakran
You'd be fine if people could only buy a gun if they could shoot and clean it, march in formation, and fight in small fireteam size groups?
|
why would i not be?
Quote:
Originally Posted by shakran
And just how many non-veteran gun owners do you think fall into that category?
|
a more appropriate question would be, why don't they?
Quote:
Originally Posted by shakran
Yes, considering it was you who advanced that theory by telling me I don't have the right to keep and bear missiles.
|
semantics and reality do not equal a negative rights theory.
Negative and positive rights - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Quote:
Originally Posted by shakran
Nowhere. Thank you for proving my 2nd amendment argument right for me. We can now have missiles, should we be able to afford them.
|
If you can carry that bad boy in to combat, then yes, you have that right.
