OK, they can be a part of my militia.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Gun Confiscation Crusade Begins
- Thread starter Wesley Briggman
- Start date
- Status
I see. You believe it a mater of faithfulness to Scripture (Jesus commanded His gollowers to "carry a sword"").
Do you view it unjust to deprive felons (even Christians with a felony background) the right to carry an AR-15?
Ironically, it is God who brought these powers into being - even Assyria and Babylon. It was God who counseled the slave to be content and the master to be kind.
Im not wrong. The constitution does not give them the authority to change it.
I believe it is unconstitutional to deprive a man who has paid his debt to society and has been rehabilitated any of his rights under the Bill of Rights.
So you refuse to admit your error and just slough off the correction?
In a debate on general rights, now you are bringing up isolated cases. We also disallow the mentally ill to have guns. And bed-ridden invalids institutionalized for life also do not have guns. So the state has limited the right to all but specific persons disqualified for specific reasons decided by the majority. Criminals do not seem to have any problems obtaining guns, anyway, so I question your example.
Did God bring Nimrod to power or did God just allow Nimrod to take power because people could not or did not defend themselves against him? Nimrod/Sargon was a terrible man. Nahum tells what those days were like.
Here, JonC, I will help you.
10 U.S. Code § 246 - Militia: composition and classes
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.
10 U.S. Code § 246 - Militia: composition and classes
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.
Rulings the where the Supreme Court overruled itself:
Involving interpretation of Article 1 of the Constitution:
In 1941 the Supreme Court overturned it’s own decision rendered in1918 related to Article 1 of the Constitution.
Involving interpretation of the 1st Amendment:
In 1985 the Supreme Court ruled that that public schools could compel students to salute the American Flag and recite the Pledge of Allegiance despite religious objections. This was overruled in 1997.
Involving interpretation of the 4th Amendment:
See Arkansas v. Sanders (1979) overruled in 1991 (California v. Acevedo)
The Supreme Court has overruled its own decisions and interpretations of Article One, Three, and Six of the Constitution. It has overruled its own decisions and interpretations of the First Amendment, Fourth Amendment, Fifth Amendment, Sixth Amendment, Eighth Amendment, Eleventh Amendment, Eleventh Amendment, and Fourteenth Amendment.
What makes you so sure that the Supreme Court could not overrule it's interpretation of the Second Amendment?
I don't need help in defending myself - I also own guns.
On this issue they would be wrong therefore it would be unlawful. The SC cannot just say whatever they want.
If Romans 13 is correct, then God actually places governments in power (and Paul wrote these words when his government was less than ideal as well).
No, but you apparently need help understanding 10 U.S.C. § 246.I don't need help in defending myself - I also own guns.
Please provide the legislation restricting the Supreme Court from overruling a past decision.
And, again, you are apparently wrong. The Supreme Court certainly seems able to say what ever they want (otherwise Adam and Steve wouldn't be married in my state).
Try reading the constitution
No, I understand it very clearly.
The organized militia consists of all able-bodied males, aged 17 to 45, who are members of the National Guard and Naval Militia. The unorganized militia consists of members of the militia - described in 246(a) - who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.
The definition was amended to read "who shall be more than seventeen years of age and not more than forty-five years of age.
I was wrong in assuming that the State Guard met the definition of "militia" as most are over 45 years of age.
So if we are using the definition of "militia" as the crux of the argument, you and I have no right to bear arms because we've long passed our prime (even if you won't admit you've passed yours).
Apparently I missed the part where the Supreme Court cannot overrule a previous decision. And since it's happened numerous times (WAY more than a few times, and involving both the Constitution and amendments), the burden of proof is on you to provide where the Constitution prohibits such actions.
Isn't that what you ask of others on this forum....to back up what they say with proof?
I was wrong about the definition of militia (as @TCassidy pointed out). Cough up the references, brother. If you are right then I'll gladly admit it.
Is that statement introduced by a restrictive clause or by a nonrestrictive clause?
So when the constitution says "the right of the people" it is not talking about individual rights?
Ad it's sheer nonsense to say any such amendment was or is necessary for a state to maintain one or more militias under the authority of the feds.
So which is it? The Bill of Rights grant rights to individuals or to the states, necessary or not?
- Status