TexasCHLforum.com

G.A. Heath wrote:My point is the absurdity of using the modern definition.

b. Of troops: Properly disciplined. Obs. rare-1.

1690 Lond. Gaz. No. 2568/3 We hear likewise that the French are in a great Allarm in Dauphine and Bresse, not having at present 1500 Men of regulated Troops on that side.

The project of disciplining all the militia of the United States is as futile as it would be injurious if it were capable of being carried into execution. A tolerable expertness in military movements is a business that requires time and practice. It is not a day, nor a week nor even a month, that will suffice for the attainment of it. To oblige the great body of the yeomanry and of the other classes of the citizens to be under arms for the purpose of going through military exercises and evolutions, as often as might be necessary to acquire the degree of perfection which would entitle them to the character of a well regulated militia, would be a real grievance to the people and a serious public inconvenience and loss.
        --- The Federalist Papers, No. 29.

10001110101 wrote:

Ameer wrote:

RottenApple wrote:Ergo, your freedom to move about has NOT been restricted.

Somebody show me where the Constitution authorizes the TSA's powers.

Being the devil's advocate here; show me where it says I need a CHL to carry my weapon. In my opinion, the TSA is completely ineffective as a deterrent to terrorist activities. The guys that went unnoticed by the FBI, CIA, etc. were able to get their devices on a plane right under the noses of TSA. The others were apprehended by real law enforcement before being able to even get to the airport to carry out their plan. So tell me; what do we need the TSA for? They are the sole reason I have not and will not voluntarily fly anywhere since 2001 and flying is probably one of the most enjoyable experiences to me.