- Joined
- Jun 16, 2014
- Messages
- 13,021
- Reaction score
- 2,641
- Location
- UP of Michigan
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Psst, the 2nd A says nothing about who is to regulate the militia, or define the term. Any group of Americans can, and do, form militias or groups based on mutual cooperation during times of crises, and hey guess what, most are probably fairly well regulated since many such groups include those with LE and Military backgrounds. Nice try, been refuted many times.Due Process Laws/Regulation of the Militia:
I think your people’s idea of making the no fly list the no fly no buy list is so idiotic, that I am very upset with all of you.
If you ban the kind of weaponry the people need to balance the power of Government I will have to endure it because your opposition has no economic program.
For those of you who say it is only the next step, what, are you weaklings?
There’s got to be a legal loop hole or argument where by we can slap a whole bunch of regulations on the People?
That’s it, the militia is always well regulated and since this is the purpose of the right; to maintain a militia, you are free to impose a whole bunch of regulations .
But are you that stupid, no fly no buy list?
You should have due process for both.
You need to write in this legislation that you cannot discriminate on the basis of the list. You can’t see if your neighbor is on it. Only gun dealers can use it.
Go on now, you have lots of legislation to compose.
More so you should have a gun purchase list and being on it could be the aspiration of your youth.
People should be notified when they’re put on these lists.
Making only one list is so stupid because you got to include the mentally ill and those who abuse their freedom of speech (are guilty of terroristic threatening.)
That’s one of the regulations of the Militia, how you speak about your weapon, otherwise you can’t have one, you’re kicked out of the Militia.
Go now, go write your "Regulations of the Militia."
Well, if you put it like that, ha ha ha.There are too many unanswered questions about these fast evolving "compromise" proposals.
1) Which lists, subset or superset of those lists, is valid to use to deny a constitutional right?
2) What, exactly, gets one onto those lists? Who, exactly, can alter those reasons?
3) It appears that even if one is no longer on "the" list(s) then they are on some (other?) list of those that used to be on "the" list(s) (for up to five years?). That is pure hog wash because there must have been a reason to remove one from "the" list(s) in the first place. Does that mean one can ask if they were on "the" liist, be told no and yet still not have the right to buy (own?) a gun?
4) If one is on (or used to be on) one of these (secret?) lists is it then a (federal?) crime for them to have a gun?
5) Can we really trust a government that would redact and then un-redact a 911 recording all while refusing to say who made either of those completely oppostie decisions?
There are too many unanswered questions about these fast evolving "compromise" proposals.
1) Which lists, subset or superset of those lists, is valid to use to deny a constitutional right?
2) What, exactly, gets one onto those lists? Who, exactly, can alter those reasons?
3) It appears that even if one is no longer on "the" list(s) then they are on some (other?) list of those that used to be on "the" list(s) (for up to five years?). That is pure hog wash because there must have been a reason to remove one from "the" list(s) in the first place. Does that mean one can ask if they were on "the" liist, be told no and yet still not have the right to buy (own?) a gun?
4) If one is on (or used to be on) one of these (secret?) lists is it then a (federal?) crime for them to have a gun?
5) Can we really trust a government that would redact and then un-redact a 911 recording all while refusing to say who made either of those completely oppostie decisions?
The Obama administration will place every registered gun owner in America on the list.
There are too many unanswered questions about these fast evolving "compromise" proposals.
1) Which lists, subset or superset of those lists, is valid to use to deny a constitutional right?
2) What, exactly, gets one onto those lists? Who, exactly, can alter those reasons?
3) It appears that even if one is no longer on "the" list(s) then they are on some (other?) list of those that used to be on "the" list(s) (for up to five years?). That is pure hog wash because there must have been a reason to remove one from "the" list(s) in the first place. Does that mean one can ask if they were on "the" liist, be told no and yet still not have the right to buy (own?) a gun?
4) If one is on (or used to be on) one of these (secret?) lists is it then a (federal?) crime for them to have a gun?
5) Can we really trust a government that would redact and then un-redact a 911 recording all while refusing to say who made either of those completely oppostie decisions?
The Obama administration will place every registered gun owner in America on the list.
Got to get them to comply, good luck with that and without all or even most owners complying their registration would be useless.
Psst, the 2nd A says nothing about who is to regulate the militia, or define the term. Any group of Americans can, and do, form militias or groups based on mutual cooperation during times of crises, and hey guess what, most are probably fairly well regulated since many such groups include those with LE and Military backgrounds. Nice try, been refuted many times.
Oh, as for the no fly list, do you know how you end up on one? Me thinks not.
The Militia is regulated by the Government, the President; the Commander in Chief balanced with the Legislature and Courts. That is why you write nice legislation and give the Courts power.
The President actually has nothing to do with it. He could give orders to Militias if there was a need and all Militias should rally to the President and Armed Forces. No Militia can rally to a foreign force. These are not allowed.
I know I want to go gaze at al what's his name, see what nonsense he's spouting, but I don't want to get on no list and find my ticket is non-refundable.
A no fly list that is not regulated by law is not something you want to tie gun ownership to, enough said on that.
The government can not constitutionally deprive the second amendment rights of citizens without due process. Period.
Yes, I agree with you.
But not that enough has been said.
Instead of whining poorly for no buy list you need to be screaming for due process for those on the no fly list and when you've established due process there make a no buy list.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?