• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Firearms are for sporting and hunting

Bubba said:
Gun rights are about hunting and sporting ?
Click to expand...

Straw man. The Second Amendment mentions nothing about hunting and sporting. The only allusion made to the intended use of private arms in the Constitution is as part of a well-regulated militia, which is about safety and security. It certainly isn't about general skepticism and the paranormal. If you're going to give us a shotgun blast of trolling, at least trying to get your posts into the right subforum.
 
The Second Amendment is actually about the US government not paying for its military forces but expecting the citizens to pick up the bill by arming themselves so they can be drafted into militia. It could be viewed as a "sneak tax" plus "forced military service". ;)
 
WHAT I CAN'T DO FOR MYSELF MR. GLOCK WILL DO FOR ME!

THAT'S what guns are for. Muh.
 
Norman Alexander said:
The Second Amendment is actually about the US government not paying for its military forces but expecting the citizens to pick up the bill by arming themselves so they can be drafted into militia. It could be viewed as a "sneak tax" plus "forced military service". ;)
Click to expand...

Many countries used the idea of a levee en masse to avoid having to pay for a professional army (or for mercenary forces). It only works well if there is actual regulation involved (common calibres of small arms, enforcing actual training, tactical manuals that take into account the largely untrained nature of the force, etc.). The US and Canadian militias of this sort were a joke and more of a hindrance to the trained forces they fought beside.
 
JayUtah said:
Straw man. The Second Amendment mentions nothing about hunting and sporting. The only allusion made to the intended use of private arms in the Constitution is as part of a well-regulated militia, which is about safety and security. It certainly isn't about general skepticism and the paranormal. If you're going to give us a shotgun blast of trolling, at least trying to get your posts into the right subforum.
Click to expand...

Yes it is about negating the need for a standing army. No one wants something as bad as that. That is why we need to disband most of the military to get back to what our founders intended.
 
It thought they were a substitute for Americans unwillingness to pay for law enforcement.
 
The courts have also expanded the right to private ownership of firearms beyond the need for national defense. So OP, what is your point?
 
JayUtah said:
Straw man. The Second Amendment mentions nothing about hunting and sporting. The only allusion made to the intended use of private arms in the Constitution is as part of a well-regulated militia, which is about safety and security. It certainly isn't about general skepticism and the paranormal. If you're going to give us a shotgun blast of trolling, at least trying to get your posts into the right subforum.
Click to expand...

I wonder how a law that forced gun owners to join their state's national guard would go down.....
 
theprestige said:
Also warfare, self defense, defense of others, defense of property, armed revolt... Firearms are legitimately quite useful!
Click to expand...
I repeat that the use of firearms in self defense, despite the near-religious convictions of some American firearm owners, is not even remotely necessary.

And armed revolt? Seriously?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom