do you?

[Lachlan]

You really are lost in the fog, aint ya?

have you done any research?

why are they talking about manipulating the words of the 2nd amendment? I hope everyone fully understands it.. they want to take our rights to have a militia away they want to have no opposition to themselves...[/quote]
Well I mean they could have died of Covid...

As for these militia it is not a good idea to have so many armed groups and especially ones run by idiots who think breaking into capitol hill and attacking policemen is a good idea. It's not that they don't want you to have militias but some have extreme views and then get funny ideas about overthrowing the democratically elected government and thinking they have the support to do it. Some also think spies have infiltrated the country, the communists are going to attack, attack 5g antennas because they cause cancer and people like you Mack who think vaccines kill you which they don't. That is why they want to shut down some armed groups.[/quote]


are you talking about blm because it sounds like it....

these militias are what has made us who we are.. we would not be the USA with out that right..

that is what has kept the eliets in line... thats the whole reason the founders created the damn thing

that's my point they were old and in bad health before this covid crap then they finaly pass with covid and that's marked as a covid caused death... that type of stuff caused this uproar.. why did they blow it up like that is the question.

You really are lost in the fog, aint ya?

have you done any research?

why are they talking about manipulating the words of the 2nd amendment? I hope everyone fully understands it.. they want to take our rights to have a militia away they want to have no opposition to themselves...

The wording of the 2nd Amendment has been debated, argued and re-interpretted several times in US history. If there is one thing constitutional scholars and lawyers can agree on it is that none of them can agree on what the Founding Fathers actually meant in the wording that was used. It is ambiguous, even contradictory. Lawyers love those kinds of ambiguities... that's fat fees for generations of legal eagles.

The current interpretation on the right to bear arms, upon which the legal arguments around that right are based, is not even that old. (2008 : Supreme Court)

But I like your interpretation of 'death by covid' : so, as long as my victim is already old or suffering from some serious illness, I can freely bludgeon them to death cos, you know, they was dying anyway so no reason to start sticking murder down as a cause of death....

it is only debated when there are people in charge that want to take things from us.. other wise they would be fine with having a free army type group protecting thier assets right

who was leading in 08?[/quote]
Mack if a leader had control of a nations armed forces a bunch of lightly armed and poorly trained overweight middle age citizens aren't going to do shit. Only if a leader has partial or little control over the US military would these militia's be anywhere near useful. However if these militias have extreme view they can cause damage before law enforcement agencies react. Most of these militias don't really protect neighborhoods or whatever. That's what police are for.

[Meliva]

Kim, you are forgetting that the people in militaries are not mindless drones that blindly obey orders. If let's say Biden were to order the military to hunt down and kill anyone who publicly criticizes the government, There are bound to be folks in the military who are going to refuse such an order.

Not to mention that, you are underestimating how much a militia can accomplish, especially using guerilla warfare. Plus, wouldn't be easy using a lot of the bigger advantages like airplanes and tanks, since those would also do a lot of damage to cities and bystanders. Then you got the fact that while the government would be trying to wipe out the militia, a lot of businesses and other industries would be crippled, especially if the milita decides to destroy roads and bridges to muck up supply lines. Then, you got the fact that while the government is doing this, outside nations may use it as a chance to strike, or try to help the milita.

Folks seriously underestimate just how much a milita could get done. They just think "tanks and airplanes and good soldiers would make it pointless". Sure, it would if the milita were on one side attacking head on the other, but only idiots would rush in guns blazing with no plan or strategy.

[Dmanwuzhere]

lol every state has a few militias some bigger than others and most of them are ran by or the ranks include active/inactive military and first responders including the police
heres a couple to get ya thinking

https://cspoa.org/
https://oathkeepers.org/
three percenters

while some branches of these are paramilitary some are not but the information network being built considering there are law enforcement and military members means arrests raids and other actions would be leaked counteracted or avoided with just a phone call

there are many types of militias some talk some train and some fight laws legally but at the end of the day the military would be split if orders to kill americans en masse were handed down it would boil down to each person enacting that order to decide whether they placed value on the oath they took and just who the domestic enemy was

but by your response kim i dont think you understand the number of americans who own firearms at home and just how crazy it could get
just think about these numbers and tell me its all some fat middle aged guys saying here hold my beer
https://bearingarms.com/jennjacques/201 ... ica-n30323

[Lachlan]

Kim, you are forgetting that the people in militaries are not mindless drones that blindly obey orders. If let's say Biden were to order the military to hunt down and kill anyone who publicly criticizes the government, There are bound to be folks in the military who are going to refuse such an order.

Not to mention that, you are underestimating how much a militia can accomplish, especially using guerilla warfare. Plus, wouldn't be easy using a lot of the bigger advantages like airplanes and tanks, since those would also do a lot of damage to cities and bystanders. Then you got the fact that while the government would be trying to wipe out the militia, a lot of businesses and other industries would be crippled, especially if the milita decides to destroy roads and bridges to muck up supply lines. Then, you got the fact that while the government is doing this, outside nations may use it as a chance to strike, or try to help the milita.

Folks seriously underestimate just how much a milita could get done. They just think "tanks and airplanes and good soldiers would make it pointless". Sure, it would if the milita were on one side attacking head on the other, but only idiots would rush in guns blazing with no plan or strategy.

yeah I know I was saying that would be unlikely a leader of a country having full control over the military.

[Lachlan]

lol every state has a few militias some bigger than others and most of them are ran by or the ranks include active/inactive military and first responders including the police
heres a couple to get ya thinking

https://cspoa.org/
https://oathkeepers.org/
three percenters

while some branches of these are paramilitary some are not but the information network being built considering there are law enforcement and military members means arrests raids and other actions would be leaked counteracted or avoided with just a phone call

there are many types of militias some talk some train and some fight laws legally but at the end of the day the military would be split if orders to kill americans en masse were handed down it would boil down to each person enacting that order to decide whether they placed value on the oath they took and just who the domestic enemy was

but by your response kim i dont think you understand the number of americans who own firearms at home and just how crazy it could get
just think about these numbers and tell me its all some fat middle aged guys saying here hold my beer
https://bearingarms.com/jennjacques/201 ... ica-n30323

I'm aware of the amount of guns in America approximately, I'm just saying some militias are likely pretty poorly trained but I'll bet there are some pretty good ones out there.

[Meliva]

Seems to me that now you're backpedaling.

Mack if a leader had control of a nations armed forces a bunch of lightly armed and poorly trained overweight middle age citizens aren't going to do shit. Only if a leader has partial or little control over the US military would these militia's be anywhere near useful.

From the look of what you said in that quote, seems like you're implying militias are just poorly trained overweight folks. Plus, even if they had full control of the military, depending on how far they are willing to go, a good Militia could still make a difference. I mean, sure they could use planes and bomb areas with lots of militia folk in it, but they'd be crippling their own infrastructure and slaughtering their own citizens.

It's far easier and safer to be a tyrant to the people when they have no guns and your men do. Sure, tanks and planes are better then guns, which is often a point critics make about a militia, but again-tanks and planes will cause a lot of collateral damage. That's not too much of an issue in foreign lands, and on foreign citizens, since once the fight is done, it's not your problem, but using it on your own people and land and buildings? Sure, you wipe out the milita, but you also cripple your infrastructure if you ain't careful.

[Mack]

You really are lost in the fog, aint ya?

Mack: have you done any research?

Mack: why are they talking about manipulating the words of the 2nd amendment? I hope everyone fully understands it.. they want to take our rights to have a militia away they want to have no opposition to themselves...

Kim Jong Un:Well I mean they could have died of Covid...

As for these militia it is not a good idea to have so many armed groups and especially ones run by idiots who think breaking into capitol hill and attacking policemen is a good idea. It's not that they don't want you to have militias but some have extreme views and then get funny ideas about overthrowing the democratically elected government and thinking they have the support to do it. Some also think spies have infiltrated the country, the communists are going to attack, attack 5g antennas because they cause cancer and people like you Mack who think vaccines kill you which they don't. That is why they want to shut down some armed groups.[/quote]


Mack: are you talking about blm because it sounds like it....

these militias are what has made us who we are.. we would not be the USA with out that right..

that is what has kept the eliets in line... thats the whole reason the founders created the damn thing

that's my point they were old and in bad health before this covid crap then they finaly pass with covid and that's marked as a covid caused death... that type of stuff caused this uproar.. why did they blow it up like that is the question.

You really are lost in the fog, aint ya?

Mack: have you done any research?

Mack: why are they talking about manipulating the words of the 2nd amendment? I hope everyone fully understands it.. they want to take our rights to have a militia away they want to have no opposition to themselves...

Mostly Harmless: The wording of the 2nd Amendment has been debated, argued and re-interpretted several times in US history. If there is one thing constitutional scholars and lawyers can agree on it is that none of them can agree on what the Founding Fathers actually meant in the wording that was used. It is ambiguous, even contradictory. Lawyers love those kinds of ambiguities... that's fat fees for generations of legal eagles.

The current interpretation on the right to bear arms, upon which the legal arguments around that right are based, is not even that old. (2008 : Supreme Court)

But I like your interpretation of 'death by covid' : so, as long as my victim is already old or suffering from some serious illness, I can freely bludgeon them to death cos, you know, they was dying anyway so no reason to start sticking murder down as a cause of death....

it is only debated when there are people in charge that want to take things from us.. other wise they would be fine with having a free army type group protecting thier assets right

Mack: who was leading in 08?[/quote]


Kim Jong Un : Mack if a leader had control of a nations armed forces a bunch of lightly armed and poorly trained overweight middle age citizens aren't going to do shit. Only if a leader has partial or little control over the US military would these militia's be anywhere near useful. However if these militias have extreme view they can cause damage before law enforcement agencies react. Most of these militias don't really protect neighborhoods or whatever. That's what police are for.[/quote]


Mack: the founders knew bexause jt had happend sk many tjmes in the past already that with great power comes great temptations...............

[Lachlan]

Seems to me that now you're backpedaling.

Mack if a leader had control of a nations armed forces a bunch of lightly armed and poorly trained overweight middle age citizens aren't going to do shit. Only if a leader has partial or little control over the US military would these militia's be anywhere near useful.

From the look of what you said in that quote, seems like you're implying militias are just poorly trained overweight folks. Plus, even if they had full control of the military, depending on how far they are willing to go, a good Militia could still make a difference. I mean, sure they could use planes and bomb areas with lots of militia folk in it, but they'd be crippling their own infrastructure and slaughtering their own citizens.

It's far easier and safer to be a tyrant to the people when they have no guns and your men do. Sure, tanks and planes are better then guns, which is often a point critics make about a militia, but again-tanks and planes will cause a lot of collateral damage. That's not too much of an issue in foreign lands, and on foreign citizens, since once the fight is done, it's not your problem, but using it on your own people and land and buildings? Sure, you wipe out the milita, but you also cripple your infrastructure if you ain't careful.

how am I backpedaling?

[Meliva]

Literally just read the thing you said in the quote I made, then read what you said after a few folks talked about how militias are better then what you think.

First you call militias

a bunch of lightly armed and poorly trained overweight middle age citizens [who] aren't going to do shit.

Then, you said in your next post after a few folks argued for militias.

I'm just saying some militias are likely pretty poorly trained but I'll bet there are some pretty good ones out there.

That's literally backpedaling mate. You said your opinion, then when folks argued against it, and you realized perhaps you were wrong, you said something different from your first message.

[Lachlan]

Literally just read the thing you said in the quote I made, then read what you said after a few folks talked about how militias are better then what you think.

First you call militias

a bunch of lightly armed and poorly trained overweight middle age citizens [who] aren't going to do shit.

Then, you said in your next post after a few folks argued for militias.

I'm just saying some militias are likely pretty poorly trained but I'll bet there are some pretty good ones out there.

That's literally backpedaling mate. You said your opinion, then when folks argued against it, and you realized perhaps you were wrong, you said something different from your first message.

not really, I'm still saying the majority are likely not very well trained but I added that some ones like Dmanzwhere said were ex military so they would likely be decent. I assumed we were discussing the average militia or the majority of them. In my first post I was saying your average militia is poor quality and in my second post I added I was aware that a select few are good but not the majority. I mean the definition of a militia is non professional citizen soldiers that in a crisis will for the most part voluntarily fight. For example the Volkssturm were non professional older men but some units were quite professional since they were ww1 veterans. That would be the same with US militias. Most would be terrible but some would be quite good since they were previously professional soldiers.