News Why is Fox News so chaotic and unorganized?

[Archon]

This is a false stereotype of gun owners. Many gun owners are against the Democrats because the Democrats as a party are fiercely anti-gun. That doesn't make gun owners right wing extremists, or even necessariy pro-Bush.

More than this, the point was that Democrats aren't in general (notice these two words) pro-gun, even though they seem to have more need of the protection that guns would provide from tyranny. Note that the government is conservative. You can replace "more extreme conservatives" with "conservatives in general" at your leisure.

Also, can you provide some sources to back up your belief that those people who most avidly seek to own guns aren't in general the more extreme conservatives? Becuase I still think the words "avidly" and "in general" make this statement true.

All of that is irrelevant to the relationship between guns and rebellion. Back right after the fall of Baghdad, anti-gun propagandists were deriding the gun/rebellion link because the population of Iraq has a large percentage of gun owners. Yet, it was said, they didn't revolt. I haven't heard this argument made recently, for some reason BTW, the current uprising in Iraq shows how weak the "Armies have much better arms than private citizens" argument is.

The so-called uprising in Iraq is not composed of people toting small arms or even "conventional" weapons of any type. The great majority of "insurgents" use terrorism precisely because a direct confrontation of the obviously superior American forces is simultaneously suicidal and ineffectual.

You seem to be comparing me to "anti-gun propagandists deriding the gun/rebellion link," even though my position is that guns ownership is reasonable if it's for exactly this purpose. I'm just saying that if a rebellion becomes necessary, it won't be a good idea for you to jump in front of a column of heavily-armed American soldiers and start shooting your handgun at them.

So you can't accept gun owners unless they think like left wing partisans?

This is true if you think that the framers of the Constitution were "left wing partisans." Because it is not I, but the Constitution, that mentions the right to bear arms specifically in the context of the need for a militia. Reread the Second Amendment.

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

This is true if you think that the framers of the Constitution were "left wing partisans." Because it is not I, but the Constitution, that mentions the right to bear arms specifically in the context of the need for a militia. Reread the Second Amendment.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

As you can see it mentions a militia being necessary to the security of a free state as a reason but it does not specifically state that the right to bear arms is for this purpose only.

And this is getting rather off topic.

 

[The Smoking Man]

As you can see it mentions a militia being necessary to the security of a free state as a reason but it does not specifically state that the right to bear arms is for this purpose only.

And this is getting rather off topic.

Has nobody in America yet figured out that 'Militia' seems to have had a different meaning in the time of the founding fathers?

Have they also figured out that the Militia was the 'national guard' of the day? THEY WERE PAID TROOPS!

This is from Thomas Jefferson's http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/etcbin/browse-mixed-new?id=JefVirg&tag=public&images=images/modeng&data=/texts/english/modeng/parsed Published: 1781-1782:

"Military force"
The number and condition of the militia and regular troops, and their pay?
Military​

[Note: I cut the tables which state the strength of the 'Militia' based on the census]

Every able-bodied freeman, between the ages of 16 and 50, is enrolled in the militia. Those of every county are formed into companies, and these again into one or more battalions, according to the numbers in the county. They are commanded by colonels, and other subordinate officers, as in the regular service. In every county is a county-lieutenant, who commands the whole militia of his county, but ranks only as a colonel in the field. We have no general officers always existing. These are appointed occasionally, when an invasion or insurrection happens, and their commission determines with the occasion. The governor is head of the military, as well as civil power. The law requires every militia-man to provide himself with the arms usual in the regular service. But this injunction was always indifferently complied with, and the arms they had have been so frequently called for to arm the regulars, that in the lower parts of the country they are entirely disarmed. In the middle country a fourth or fifth part of them may have such firelocks as they had provided to destroy the noxious animals which infest their farms; and on the western side of the Blue ridge they are generally armed with rifles. The pay of our militia, as well as of our regulars, is that of the Continental regulars. The condition of our regulars, of whom we have none but Continentals, and part of a battalion of state troops, is so constantly on the change, that a state of it at this day would not be its state a month hence. It is much the same with the condition of the other Continental troops, which is well enough known.

"Marine force"
The marine?​

Marine

Before the present invasion of this state by the British under the command of General Phillips, we had three vessels of 16 guns, one of 14, five small gallies, and two or three armed boats. They were generally so badly manned as seldom to be in condition for service. Since the perfect possession of our rivers assumed by the enemy, believe we are left with a single armed boat only.

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

The term militia now a days is almost a dirty word. You might as well call some one a member of the KKK or a neo nazi. Here in the US anyway.

 

[edward]

Hmm It looks like a good portion of our militia is now in Iraq. And for arms they aren't using the six shooters that they kept under their beds at home.

 

[The Smoking Man]

The term militia now a days is almost a dirty word. You might as well call some one a member of the KKK or a neo nazi. Here in the US anyway.

Yes but do you realize it was a form of draft?

These people were EXPECTED to fight and could be 'http://www.ushistory.org/brandywine/special/art01.htm '.:

Who Were the Minutemen?​

Although the terms militia and minutemen are sometimes used interchangeably today, in the 18th century there was a decided difference between the two. Militia were men in arms formed to protect their towns from foreign invasion and ravages of war. Minutemen were a small hand-picked elite force which were required to be highly mobile and able to assemble quickly. Minutemen were selected from militia muster rolls by their commanding officers. Typically 25 years of age or younger, they were chosen for their enthusiasm, reliability, and physical strength. Usually about one quarter of the militia served as Minutemen, performing additional duties as such. The Minutemen were the first armed militia to arrive or await a battle.

Although today Minutemen are thought of as connected to the Revolutionary War in America, their existence was conceived in Massachusetts during the mid-seventeenth century. As early as 1645, men were selected from the militia ranks to be dressed with matchlocks or pikes and accoutrements within half an hour of being warned. In 1689 another type of Minuteman company came into existence. Called Snowshoemen, each was to "provide himself with a good pair of snowshoes, one pair of moggisons, and one hatchet" and to be ready to march on a moment's warning. Minutemen also played a role in the French and Indian War in the 1750's. A journal entry from Samuel Thompson, a Massachusetts militia officer, states, "...but when our men were gone, they sent eleven more at one minute's warning, with 3 days provision..." By the time of the Revolution, Minutemen had been a well-trained force for six generations in the Massachusetts Bay Colony. Every town had maintained its 'training band'. The adversity that this region faced-Native-American uprisings, war with France, and potential for local insurrections, social unrest, and rioting-provided ample reason to adhere to a sound militia organization.

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

Yes but do you realize it was a form of draft?

These people were EXPECTED to fight and could be 'http://www.ushistory.org/brandywine/special/art01.htm '.:

That's more or less the way it worked back then just about anywhere isn't it? Young men were expected to take part in the military in one fashion or another. They still have mandatory military service in a number of countries.

So are you just trying to get at the idea that these people were considered military so a non-military militia, representative of the community itself or just a particular group of citizens, is not what was intended by the framers of teh constitution?

We really ought to split this to another thread.

 

[The Smoking Man]

That's more or less the way it worked back then just about anywhere isn't it? Young men were expected to take part in the military in one fashion or another. They still have mandatory military service in a number of countries.

So are you just trying to get at the idea that these people were considered military so a non-military militia, representative of the community itself or just a particular group of citizens, is not what was intended by the framers of teh constitution?

That is exactly what I am saying and that the militia itself was under the direct control of state government as described by Jefferson's description of the Command structure. Note also that the commanders are also appointed and 'commissioned'.

Those of every county are formed into companies, and these again into one or more battalions, according to the numbers in the county. They are commanded by colonels, and other subordinate officers, as in the regular service. In every county is a county-lieutenant, who commands the whole militia of his county, but ranks only as a colonel in the field. We have no general officers always existing. These are appointed occasionally, when an invasion or insurrection happens, and their commission determines with the occasion. The governor is head of the military, as well as civil power.

Those are Jefferson's own words. Obviously the gun lobby of today interprets the word using today's meaning and applies it so.

If we had a pice of legislation from the 17th century stating that 'all people have the right to be happy and gay', that would be like saying they meant them to be 'happy and homosexual' because of the change in word meaning.