Total Posts:11|Showing Posts:1-11
Jump to topic:

A well regulated Militia

Magic8000
Posts: 975
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/10/2013 12:43:36 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to print and bear arms shall not be infringed"

http://defcad.org...

What do you guys think of these printable firearms? They got removed from defcad, but they're still available elsewhere.
404 coherent debate topic not found. Please restart the debate with clear resolution.

"So Magic8000 believes Einstein was a proctologist who was persuaded by the Government and Hitler to fabricate the Theory of Relativity"- GWL-CPA
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/10/2013 3:16:00 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/10/2013 12:43:36 PM, Magic8000 wrote:
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to print and bear arms shall not be infringed"

http://defcad.org...

What do you guys think of these printable firearms? They got removed from defcad, but they're still available elsewhere.

A strict reading of the Second amendment would suggest there is no right to acquire guns; only to keep and bear them. So, I suppose the printing of guns is outside the scope of this law.
My work here is, finally, done.
lewis20
Posts: 5,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/10/2013 3:20:24 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/10/2013 3:16:00 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 5/10/2013 12:43:36 PM, Magic8000 wrote:
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to print and bear arms shall not be infringed"

http://defcad.org...

What do you guys think of these printable firearms? They got removed from defcad, but they're still available elsewhere.

A strict reading of the Second amendment would suggest there is no right to acquire guns; only to keep and bear them. So, I suppose the printing of guns is outside the scope of this law.

? How could you have the right to something but not the right to acquire it?
"If you are a racist I will attack you with the north"- Abraham Lincoln

"Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material" - Leviticus 19 19

"War is a racket" - Smedley Butler
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/10/2013 3:27:00 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/10/2013 3:20:24 PM, lewis20 wrote:
At 5/10/2013 3:16:00 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 5/10/2013 12:43:36 PM, Magic8000 wrote:
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to print and bear arms shall not be infringed"

http://defcad.org...

What do you guys think of these printable firearms? They got removed from defcad, but they're still available elsewhere.

A strict reading of the Second amendment would suggest there is no right to acquire guns; only to keep and bear them. So, I suppose the printing of guns is outside the scope of this law.

? How could you have the right to something but not the right to acquire it?

Where does it say you have the right to anything?
You have the right to keep and bear arms, not buy, sell, acquire, trade, etc.

It is a bit of a Catch-22, I'll admit that, but in places like Alaska (unless the law changed in the last few years), it is not illegal to have a small amount of marijuana in your home (right to privacy), yet it is still illegal to buy and sell it.

Same idea, perhaps.
I, as an 18 yr old, have the right to inherit wine (perhaps in a trust) or to have it in my possession at home. I, however, am unable to purchase any wine. I have the right to keep my possession, but not acquire it.
My work here is, finally, done.
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/10/2013 4:32:47 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I thought this thread was going to be about what the second amendment actually states. Which is that the states have the right to form their own armies.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/11/2013 8:16:21 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
No, the second amendment is about a right for individuals to bear arms. Funding state militias was discussed during the convention as the "Militia Powers Amendment" on a different day than the individual right to bear arms was discussed.

There's no question the second amendment refers to a right to keep and bear arms.

But that doesn't mean you can have whatever weapon you want. At the time of the founding, guns weren't legally allowed in the marketplace (largely because they were so crappy they tended to misfire).

The only real legal implication is that laws related to the second amendment, if challenged, will come under strict scrutiny. So no owning bazookas just because pistols are allowed. Essentially, any weapon purportedly not related to militia purposes (e.g. sawed off shotgun) can be banned.

I have no problem with that.
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/11/2013 8:29:40 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/10/2013 4:32:47 PM, FREEDO wrote:
I thought this thread was going to be about what the second amendment actually states. Which is that the states have the right to form their own armies.

States don't have a right to form their own armies. There is a difference between a standing army and a militia.

(n) standing army (a permanent army of paid soldiers)
http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu...
(n) militia (the entire body of physically fit civilians eligible by law for military service) "their troops were untrained militia"; "Congress shall have power to provide for calling forth the militia"--United States Constitution
http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu...

"That a well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defence of a free State; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided, as dangerous to liberty; and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power. " ~ ~ Section 13 of the 1776 Virginian Bill of Rights

" That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the state; and as standing armies in the time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up; And that the military should be kept under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power. " ~ Section 13 of the 1776 Pennsylvanian Bill of Rights

"A well regulated militia is the proper, natural, and sure defence of a state.
Standing armies are dangerous to liberty, and ought not to be raised or kept up without the consent of the legislature. " ~ Section 24-25 of the 1784 New Hampshire Bill of Rights

"No State shall, without the Consent of Congress... keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace,... engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay." ~ Article 1 Section 10 of the US constituion

"[The Congress shall have Power] To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;" ~ Article 1 Section 8 of the US Constitution
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
YYW
Posts: 36,355
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2013 2:08:47 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/10/2013 12:43:36 PM, Magic8000 wrote:
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to print and bear arms shall not be infringed"

http://defcad.org...

What do you guys think of these printable firearms? They got removed from defcad, but they're still available elsewhere.

The cyberpunk in me thinks this is really awesome in concept, but the pragmatist, the liberal policy strategist, etc. is concerned for a multitude of reasons that -at least I think- are patently obvious. That aside however, I think it's absurd to be alarmed about the prospect of a machine that can "print" firearms when a greater threat to national security (i.e. the materials to make explosives) can be found in home improvement and gardening stores. Regulating these seems pointless by comparison...
Tsar of DDO
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2013 4:24:34 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/13/2013 2:08:47 AM, YYW wrote:
At 5/10/2013 12:43:36 PM, Magic8000 wrote:
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to print and bear arms shall not be infringed"

http://defcad.org...

What do you guys think of these printable firearms? They got removed from defcad, but they're still available elsewhere.

The cyberpunk in me thinks this is really awesome in concept, but the pragmatist, the liberal policy strategist, etc. is concerned for a multitude of reasons that -at least I think- are patently obvious. That aside however, I think it's absurd to be alarmed about the prospect of a machine that can "print" firearms when a greater threat to national security (i.e. the materials to make explosives) can be found in home improvement and gardening stores. Regulating these seems pointless by comparison...

I never thought I'd be comforted by the thought of how easy it is to make a home made bomb.