the 2nd amendment is so that we the people can protect ourselves from private invasions by the "militia (read military)", not so that we can form a militia. This idea would essentially amount to us giving up our 2nd amendment rather than preserving it, because we would be essentially confessing to the gun control crowd that the 2nd amendment was about forming a militia and not about protecting personal freedom.thatguyoverthere wrote:An interesting idea that may need to be considered based on the direction the country seems to be headed.
If it's already been mentioned somewhere else here, my apologies.
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles ... esist.html
Basically, the article talks about the probability that sooner or later, we certainly will have a Democrat president, and Democrat House & Senate. When that happens, they may have the opportunity to appoint one or more new Supreme Court justices. That future Democrat controlled legislature will also almost certainly eventually pass very restrictive, sweeping gun laws, which will be upheld by the new liberal Supreme Court.
The writer's proposed solution would be for the states to exercise their rights to pass state legislation to create a formal state militia, of which all legal gun owners would be automatically included. Then there could be no argument that the 2nd Amendment does definitely apply to those gun owners, because they are the legally defined militia, as mentioned in the 2A.
Of course, there are other considerations. Check out the short article. It's an interesting read.
So what are your thoughts on the idea?
Search found 1 match
Return to “IF They're Only for Militia, Let's Be Militia!”
- Wed Oct 12, 2016 9:37 am
- Forum: Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues
- Topic: IF They're Only for Militia, Let's Be Militia!
- Replies: 27
- Views: 4057