HB 129

[lovehunting]

So the bill is headed to the governors desk. Will NRA intervene and file a law suit on 2nd amendment? Sad day for New Mexicans

 

[BUGLEnmIN]

So the bill is headed to the governors desk. Will NRA intervene and file a law suit on 2nd amendment? Sad day for New Mexicans

Nobodies coming to save us!

Its governments like the one we’re in currently which is why we were left with a 2nd amendment by the founding fathers.
How ironic!

 

[Homer]

Nobodies coming to save us!

Its governments like the one we’re in currently which is why we were left with a 2nd amendment by the founding fathers.
How ironic!

no truer words ever spoken.....

 

[lovehunting]

Nobodies coming to save us!

Its governments like the one we’re in currently which is why we were left with a 2nd amendment by the founding fathers.
How ironic!

I am afraid you may be right my friend.

 

[BUGLEnmIN]

It’s way past time guys…… sucks. Gotta do what we gotta do!

 

[Slick8]

So the bill is headed to the governors desk. Will NRA intervene and file a law suit on 2nd amendment? Sad day for New Mexicans

Man, with EGG on their face currently, this would be a great time for the NRA to step up and do what they say they'll do.

Sadly, I wouldn't hold my breath on that one.

Hate to hear this, blue state / red state, it doesn't matter. This is the slow but steady erosion of our constitutional rights by the left.

 

[BUGLEnmIN]

Man, with EGG on their face currently, this would be a great time for the NRA to step up and do what they say they'll do.

Sadly, I wouldn't hold my breath on that one.

Hate to hear this, blue state / red state, it doesn't matter. This is the slow but steady erosion of our constitutional rights by the left.

I’m inclined to agree. What do we do? Does a guy stand on a bank of a flooding river and get washed away by the rapids ?
Or does he move to where the land is stable at that moment?
It’s no lie our rights are under attack across the country, but let’s not overlook the states we do have that are standing their ground and not being flooded.
Red states are passing CONSTITUTIONAL CARRY LAWS, while blue are passing RED FLAG LAWS.
It’s just facts

 

[live4muleys]

I hesitate to say anything, because I know some of you will hate it. I know a lose is a lose and losing any of it is bad and I agree, but considering what was on the table and what we held on to, I am glad to see. Thanks to NRA, Shooting Sports and NMCOG fighting in Santa Fe, along with some of you, we were able to keep a lot of what MLG wanted gone. It is annoying we have to fight these every year.

 

[txhunter58]

I understand the slippery slope possibilities. And boiling the frog. But as gun bills go, a 7 day waiting period is pretty mild. It wouldn’t affect me even if I was a NM citizen. Unless I’m missing something else in the bill?

 

[BUGLEnmIN]

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!!!!!!!!!
The entire movement is unconstitutional and should not ever be entertained. Yet here we are at the mercy of Tyrants. Like live4muleys stated
“ It is annoying we have to fight these every year.”
It’s literally UNCONSTITUTIONAL we have to fight this at all!

 

[Trad Bow 1979]

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!!!!!!!!!
The entire movement is unconstitutional and should not ever be entertained. Yet here we are at the mercy of Tyrants. Like live4muleys stated
“ It is annoying we have to fight these every year.”
It’s literally UNCONSTITUTIONAL we have to fight this at all!

So as lawful gun owners do we view ourselves as a well regulated militia? I’ve always wondered that, and haven’t found a solid answer. Just curious how some of you view that part. I’m sure I’ll get some angry responses, so fire away.

 

[txhunter58]

So as lawful gun owners do we view ourselves as a well regulated militia? I’ve always wondered that, and haven’t found a solid answer. Just curious how some of you view that part. I’m sure I’ll get some angry responses, so fire away.

Yes I do. If we aren’t, then they could take our guns away. But that point has been backed up by the Supreme Court.

But I also don’t think 7 days infringes too badly. We have to give up somewhere to sound reasonable so that reasonable non-gun people will back us up with votes. All we have to do is plan ahead. I can do that. I already have more than 1 gun per person in my household.

 

[hunting1]

I understand the slippery slope possibilities. And boiling the frog. But as gun bills go, a 7 day waiting period is pretty mild. It wouldn’t affect me even if I was a NM citizen. Unless I’m missing something else in the bill?

Until you need it for protection and now have to wait 7-days. Too bad for that domestic abuse lady who has a restraining order, etc...

Shall not be infringed is pretty simple and no criminal gives a **** about laws.

 

[BUGLEnmIN]

Yes I do. If we aren’t, then they could take our guns away. But that point has been backed up by the Supreme Court.

But I also don’t think 7 days infringes too badly. We have to give up somewhere to sound reasonable so that reasonable non-gun people will back us up with votes. All we have to do is plan ahead. I can do that. I already have more than 1 gun per person in my household.

Just the tip? now I got kids…

 

[NM high country]

All of you that are saying it’s not that bad should just lay back down. The NM government should be fighting crime and the lawlessness they have created. They want to defund the police, have criminals go free on no bail then when criminals take advantage of all that’s in their favor these liberal democrats come after the law abiding people. They have their foot in the door now just like Colorado, NY, California, Maryland and any other liberal cess pool.

 

[smarba]

7 days may not necessarily be that bad for you or me personally. But next year when they decide it should be extended to 14, then later on 4 months...
As stated above "Shall not be infringed" is the issue. The issue isn't whether 1 day, 5 days or 7 days is the magic time period.

 

[windtalker]

My Question is who does this affect and what problem does it fix??? just a step to accomplishing what they want. total disarmament.

 

[hunting1]

All the crime or criminal bills were tabled, only the bills that go after "US" those who work and follow the law went forward. This is bigger than just an over reaching dumb gun bill.

 

[BUGLEnmIN]

My Question is who does this affect and what problem does it fix??? just a step to accomplishing what they want. total disarmament.

All the crime or criminal bills were tabled, only the bills that go after "US" those who work and follow the law went forward. This is bigger than just an over reaching dumb gun bill.

 

[txhunter58]

“the right of the people to keep and bear Arms,
SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED“

100% agree with this statement. And even if I didn’t, it’s in the constitution!

That said, does a 7 day waiting period “infringe on the right to keep and bear arms.”? You guys obviously think it does. The average American, not so sure. And not sure where the Supreme Court will come down on this. We will see.

That said: I am pretty sure Texas still has an instant back ground check on guns. If lawmakers changed that to 7 days, I would be pissed too.

And currently, NM residents can drive to Texas and buy a gun

 

[BrianID]

HB 129 isn't about reducing gun violence, it is about control. The governor and politicians behind this bill know this. If they really wanted to stop crime, they would be going after criminals instead of law abiding citizens.

At most it will be a minor inconvenience to gun owners in NM but it is the principle.

Every time I hear about MLJ, I still have a hard time believing there were enough stupid people in NM to reelect her after the whole COVID mess.

 

[BUGLEnmIN]

Every time I hear about MLJ, I still have a hard time believing there were enough stupid people in NM to reelect her after the whole COVID mess.

It’s because it didn’t happen…

 

[BrianID]

It’s because it didn’t happen…

Even if she only got 1% of the votes, that would be too many.

 

[BUGLEnmIN]

Even if she only got 1% of the votes, that would be too many.

Amen!!! They selected the leaders of the border states very carefully. So this can happen. This is only the beginning. Between Katie Hobbs installation and MLG’s they’ve made a gateway to us.

 

[lovehunting]

Great discussion, but back to my original question. Is it a infringement on the 2nd amendment ? And if so will the NRA intervene and file a lawsuit? Are they the well organized militia?

 

[Trad Bow 1979]

Yes I do. If we aren’t, then they could take our guns away. But that point has been backed up by the Supreme Court.

But I also don’t think 7 days infringes too badly. We have to give up somewhere to sound reasonable so that reasonable non-gun people will back us up with votes. All we have to do is plan ahead. I can do that. I already have more than 1 gun per person in my household.

So if you are part of a well regulated militia I suppose that you have membership or affiliation to a part time military force that assembles occasionally in order to conduct training of some sort. Oh wait that’s called the National Guard. Gun ownership doesn’t make you a soldier or a member of a well regulated militia.

 

[BUGLEnmIN]

The "militia" mentioned in the Second Amendment "comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense." In other words, the militia was not limited to a government-supervised fighting force, it consisted of all able-bodied men.

When the Second Amendment was written, the idea that Americans had an individual right (and in some cases an obligation) to possess arms for defense of both themselves and the state was widely understood. It had roots in the rights won by the Revolution.

It’s amazing how many “ hunters” are left leaning here. After what this country has experienced in the past few years alone should be enough to turn a full blown libtard to the right, much less us. One left leaning hunter is enough heart break for for a life time.

 

[BUGLEnmIN]

Great discussion, but back to my original question. Is it an infringement on the 2nd amendment ? And if so will the NRA intervene and file a lawsuit? Are they the well organized militia?

ABSOLUTELY
SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED, means exactly that!
They already did
Part of it.

 

[Trad Bow 1979]

The "militia" mentioned in the Second Amendment "comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense." In other words, the militia was not limited to a government-supervised fighting force, it consisted of all able-bodied men.

When the Second Amendment was written, the idea that Americans had an individual right (and in some cases an obligation) to possess arms for defense of both themselves and the state was widely understood. It had roots in the rights won by the Revolution.

It’s amazing how many “ hunters” are left leaning here. After what this country has experienced in the past few years alone should be enough to turn a full blown libtard to the right, much less is. One left leaning hunter is enough heart break for enough for a life time.

I am sorry if my question about defining a well regulated militia bothered you. I spent 22 years in the Army. Some years I was in the Airborne infantry, I’ve been to sniper school and I’ve seen friends of mine get blown up. I am sure I have done more for this country than most the people that talk tough about taking back the country from the Authoritarian left. I’ve been shooting guns since I was a kid and I’m teaching my 8 year old to shoot guns as well. Believe me, I ain’t no democrat. I am a person that was taught to ask questions and to not toe the line blindly. What amazes me is how some people turn critical thinking into something political. But some people need Tucker Carlson to tell them it’s dark outside so that they know it’s time to go to bed.

 

[BUGLEnmIN]

I am sorry if my question about defining a well regulated militia bothered you. I spent 22 years in the Army. Some years I was in the Airborne infantry, I’ve been to sniper school and I’ve seen friends of mine get blown up. I am sure I have done more for this country than most the people that talk tough about taking back the country from the Authoritarian left. I’ve been shooting guns since I was a kid and I’m teaching my 8 year old to shoot guns as well. Believe me, I ain’t no democrat. I am a person that was taught to ask questions and to not toe the line blindly. What amazes me is how some people turn critical thinking into something political. But some people need Tucker Carlson to tell them it’s dark outside so that they know it’s time to go to bed.

Some people just might .
Thank you for you service ! Truly…

 

[NM high country]

I am sorry if my question about defining a well regulated militia bothered you. I spent 22 years in the Army. Some years I was in the Airborne infantry, I’ve been to sniper school and I’ve seen friends of mine get blown up. I am sure I have done more for this country than most the people that talk tough about taking back the country from the Authoritarian left. I’ve been shooting guns since I was a kid and I’m teaching my 8 year old to shoot guns as well. Believe me, I ain’t no democrat. I am a person that was taught to ask questions and to not toe the line blindly. What amazes me is how some people turn critical thinking into something political. But some people need Tucker Carlson to tell them it’s dark outside so that they know it’s time to go to bed.

Half of that sounds like a liberal.

 

[txhunter58]

So if you are part of a well regulated militia I suppose that you have membership or affiliation to a part time military force that assembles occasionally in order to conduct training of some sort. Oh wait that’s called the National Guard. Gun ownership doesn’t make you a soldier or a member of a well regulated militia.

You might want to read the 2nd again. It doesn’t say that a militia has the right to bear arms. It says the PEOPLE have that right. And the Supreme Court has ruled that the 2nd refers to you and I and all American citizens

 

[txhunter58]

Your turn Trad. On the surface, it would seem that you don’t believe that every US citizen of sound mind has the guaranteed right to bear arms. Do you? That’s a simple question: yes or no. But I suspect that your answer won’t have yes or no in it

 

[txhunter58]

And no, I am not a card carrying militia member, but I stand ready to serve on one if needed, and there is no question that the founding fathers wanted all of us to have the right to own firearms in case we need to form a militia in a hurry.

But this thread is not about our right to bear arms. Regardless of what you think, that’s beyond question. The question at hand is whether or not a 7 day waiting period infringes on that right. I started out thinking it doesn’t. But the more I think about, the more I lean toward thinking it does.

 

[hunting1]

I just can't believe how many hunters and or gun owners are so willing to give up their rights. I feel sorry for our kids; this is not the country I served to protect.

 

[BUGLEnmIN]

I just can't believe how many hunters and or gun owners are so willing to give up their rights. I feel sorry for our kids; this is not the country I served to protect.

Pretty damn sad my friend!

 

[NMFROM81]

Amen!!! They selected the leaders of the border states very carefully. So this can happen. This is only the beginning. Between Katie Hobbs installation and MLG’s they’ve made a gateway to us.

View attachment 137232

I'm just gonna put out there that Mr Omar isn't one of the 2 teenagers responsible for the shooting.

Maybe Mr Omar was involved in anther KC shooting that day, but it doesn't look like he's one of the detained "teenage suspects" from the Chiefs parade. Or, maybe, that post about Omar isn't 100% accurate??

You don't have to take my word for it, look it up. Or check out the link below.

2 Teens in Custody in Kansas City, Where Police Say Dispute Led to Shooting

The authorities said they were working to determine “applicable charges” in the shooting that followed a Super Bowl victory parade. The host of a local radio show was killed, and 22 more were injured.

www.nytimes.com

 

[BUGLEnmIN]

I'm just gonna put out there that Mr Omar isn't one of the 2 teenagers responsible for the shooting.

Maybe Mr Omar was involved in anther KC shooting that day, but it doesn't look like he's one of the detained "teenage suspects" from the Chiefs parade. Or, maybe, that post about Omar isn't 100% accurate??

You don't have to take my word for it, look it up. Or check out the link below.

2 Teens in Custody in Kansas City, Where Police Say Dispute Led to Shooting

The authorities said they were working to determine “applicable charges” in the shooting that followed a Super Bowl victory parade. The host of a local radio show was killed, and 22 more were injured.

www.nytimes.com

Lotta different stories for sure. I can’t get a straight answer now from MSM . Honestly I probably wouldn’t believe them either way . Painting “2 juveniles” into the picture gives them a way to be less forthcoming. Also first reports say 3 in custody.
How about the transgender migrant who shot up Joel Osteen’s church? He drug his Daughter into that too.
Point is these people shouldn’t be here in the first place , much less to come kill Americans in theirs own country . All the “ MILITARY AGE MEN” who entered the southern border will be biggest factor in the coming days. All this militants and terrorist will be activated.

 

[txhunter58]

I was shocked when I heard last Sunday that a woman had shot up a Houston church. However, I was Not shocked to find out that “she” was born a man.

 

[NMFROM81]

Lotta different stories for sure. I can’t get a straight answer now from MSM . Honestly I probably wouldn’t believe them either way . Painting “2 juveniles” into the picture gives them a way to be less forthcoming. Also first reports say 3 in custody.
How about the transgender migrant who shot up Joel Osteen’s church? He drug into his Daughter into that too.
Point is these people shouldn’t be here in the first place , much less to come kill Americans in theirs own country . All the “ MILITARY AGE MEN” who entered the southern border will be biggest factor in the coming days. All this militants and terrorist will be activated.

There was a 3rd juvenile released after determining he wasn't involved. That wasn't Mr. Omar either, he's way past being a juvenile.

Agree with you on the border. Needs to get fixed, sooner the better.

 

[BUGLEnmIN]

There was a 3rd juvenile released after determining he wasn't involved. That wasn't Mr. Omar either, he's way past being a juvenile.

Agree with you on the border. Needs to get fixed, sooner the better.

It would be nice wouldn’t it? Of course it’s after the fact and millions have already been disbursed. Still need to seal it up regardless.

Just as I suspected, can not release names due to the age. I don’t believe a damn thing these people say any more .

 

[Servehim]

One thing I know for sure, the persons involved didn't have a Maga hat on . If they did ...msm would have their mug shots everywhere. There is a reason ,other than being juveniles ,that the public doesn't know squat and this story is soon to be ancient history.

 

[Bluehair]

Great discussion, but back to my original question. Is it a infringement on the 2nd amendment ? And if so will the NRA intervene and file a lawsuit? Are they the well organized militia?

There always seems to be similar unconstitutional legislation proposed here as well.

It appears to be an effort to bankrupt the Right Wing. Their money is fed directly into liberal agencies by the leftist legal industrial complex.

It appears to be working.

 

[BUGLEnmIN]

One thing I know for sure, the persons involved didn't have a Maga hat on . If they did ...msm would have their mug shots everywhere. There is a reason ,other than being juveniles ,that the public doesn't know squat and this story is soon to be ancient history.

Nice to see there are some who really get what’s happening here!!!

 

[txhunter58]

How bout it Trad? For the question I asked, there is no grey area. It’s black or white. So what’s your answer: Yes or no?

 

[sbeard4]

So as lawful gun owners do we view ourselves as a well regulated militia? I’ve always wondered that, and haven’t found a solid answer. Just curious how some of you view that part. I’m sure I’ll get some angry responses, so fire away.

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
That’s (the focus on the militia aspect and people being part of a militia) one way of taking it - that we are a militia. I would argue that was not the intent or purpose. RATHER-
To have a well regulated militia you need people who are experienced with firearms. This was how we won our independence. This is the other way of understanding. It is the more “correct English” interpretation as well. The first two clauses fit together and the last two clauses also stand together. If you take the second clause as just additional information then the first and third clause do not fit together at all. The first and last clause alone together would not be necessary by any means. In reality the first 2 clauses are a preamble to justify/reason out the last 2.
We wonder sometimes how all this bad stuff happens in a lot of countries and the people don’t rise up. They have no weapons or experience with them.
Despite what some Senators have argued, video games do not help one become a marksman. Shooting and shooting a lot does. Yes some people can be gifted, but they are few.

 

[sbeard4]

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
That’s (the focus on the militia aspect and people being part of a militia) one way of taking it - that we are a militia. I would argue that was not the intent or purpose. RATHER-
To have a well regulated militia you need people who are experienced with firearms. This was how we won our independence. This is the other way of understanding. It is the more “correct English” interpretation as well. The first two clauses fit together and the last two clauses also stand together. If you take the second clause as just additional information then the first and third clause do not fit together at all. The first and last clause alone together would not be necessary by any means. In reality the first 2 clauses are a preamble to justify/reason out the last 2.
We wonder sometimes how all this bad stuff happens in a lot of countries and the people don’t rise up. They have no weapons or experience with them.
Despite what some Senators have argued, video games do not help one become a marksman. Shooting and shooting a lot does. Yes some people can be gifted, but they are few.

As was stated by txhunter this latter is the conclusion of the Supreme Court as well. The peoples right to bear arms shall not be infringed because a well-regulated Militia is necessary to the security of a free state.

 

[Trad Bow 1979]

And no, I am not a card carrying militia member, but I stand ready to serve on one if needed, and there is no question that the founding fathers wanted all of us to have the right to own firearms in case we need to form a militia in a hurry.

But this thread is not about our right to bear arms. Regardless of what you think, that’s beyond question. The question at hand is whether or not a 7 day waiting period infringes on that right. I started out thinking it doesn’t. But the more I think about, the more I lean toward thinking it does.

Anyone can say they stand ready to serve, truth is most never do. I guess that’s why we are called one percenters. I’m just curious about the context of what was meant by a well regulated militia. I’m sure you’re not aware of this but up until WWII the federal army would mostly be deactivated between conflicts leaving the defense of the country up to well regulated militias or the national guard. But today we have the largest full time standing Army in the world, so we really don’t need a bunch of people showing up to take on the British. In fact some of you guys are probably more of a liability to the safety of our professional soldiers versus being the useful assets you think you are. You were concerned about me giving a yes or no answer about the 2nd amendment. My answer is yes all citizens of this country do have the right to bear arms. I was just asking about what you guys thought about the phrasing of what a well regulated militia means. Was it used in a context that doesn’t really apply anymore? And if so does it need to be updated to today’s threat level or the need of national defense. LOL you guys get triggered every time someone asks a question. It’s like some of you guys think that democracy and freedom means don’t ask questions and just think what you’re told to think. Some of you need to learn to be less sensitive and more open to discussion. I don’t know why I try to even talk to you guys anymore, there is a reason why this NM page has far less active members than it used to. Seems like most people have just moved on and I guess you can troll me out the door.

 

[txhunter58]

Wait a minute. I didn’t get angry or call you names. You said you wanted an intelligent discussion and that’s what I gave you and you get offended? I just answered your question and then asked you one.

I gave you a thoughtful answer to your militia question and I appreciate your straightforward answer to my question. You are a straight shooter in that regard.

But I’m still not sure what you added to the original issue posted. Does seem like you like to stir the pot.
Troll, no, but you got exactly what you expected and deserved. As for me, I am glad discuss issues or debate you any time.

 

[NM high country]

Anyone can say they stand ready to serve, truth is most never do. I guess that’s why we are called one percenters. I’m just curious about the context of what was meant by a well regulated militia. I’m sure you’re not aware of this but up until WWII the federal army would mostly be deactivated between conflicts leaving the defense of the country up to well regulated militias or the national guard. But today we have the largest full time standing Army in the world, so we really don’t need a bunch of people showing up to take on the British. In fact some of you guys are probably more of a liability to the safety of our professional soldiers versus being the useful assets you think you are. You were concerned about me giving a yes or no answer about the 2nd amendment. My answer is yes all citizens of this country do have the right to bear arms. I was just asking about what you guys thought about the phrasing of what a well regulated militia means. Was it used in a context that doesn’t really apply anymore? And if so does it need to be updated to today’s threat level or the need of national defense. LOL you guys get triggered every time someone asks a question. It’s like some of you guys think that democracy and freedom means don’t ask questions and just think what you’re told to think. Some of you need to learn to be less sensitive and more open to discussion. I don’t know why I try to even talk to you guys anymore, there is a reason why this NM page has far less active members than it used to. Seems like most people have just moved on and I guess you can troll me out the door.

You sound like you think you’re the only one that ever wore a uniform.

 

[Ropinfool]

Gun control isn't about the protection of the citizens, it's about the protection of the government. I believe the 2nd amendment was written to protect the citizens from the tyranny of our own government. The founding fathers knew about the corruption that grows as the government grows. What they couldn't have seen is how powerful the government has become.

 

[BUGLEnmIN]

Gun control isn't about the protection of the citizens, it's about the protection of the government. I believe the 2nd amendment was written to protect the citizens from the tyranny of our own government. The founding fathers knew about the corruption that grows as the government grows. What they couldn't have seen is how powerful the government has become.

Not so much the redcoats we’re fighting is it?
More so the turncoats ….. amazes me that some people actually do not understand why this amendment was really even implemented!
Good to see you that do though

 

[txhunter58]

Ropin: When they wrote it, they were indeed writing it to fight the tyranny of their then current government. Pretty dead on observation.

 

[Ropinfool]

I think we're definitely in the same boat as the founding fathers were.

 

[txhunter58]

To be honest Trad, you say you believe every non crazy /non felon citizen should have the absolute right to own a firearm. But everything else you say seems to indicate otherwise. Maybe I am reading too much into your comments, but sure sounds like you believe with current US military, individuals owning firearms is kinda obsolete, and you worry about some of us owning one. You of course have been in the military and know how to handle and use one, so you are OK. But maybe not me, because I’m not a “one percenter“?

 

[Ropinfool]

and if anybody is implying that only military/militia should have guns i say that's garbage

 

[BUGLEnmIN]

I think we're definitely in the same boat as the founding fathers were.

Blows my mind a member of the military doesn’t even understand the second amendment! Imagine how many others there are out there.

But today we have the largest full time standing Army in the world, so we really don’t need a bunch of people showing up to take on the British. In fact some of you guys are probably more of a liability to the safety of our professional soldiers versus being the useful assets you think you are.

this speaks volumes to the lack of understanding he has. It’s not the British that are coming! It’s the corrupt federal tyrannical government of the USA .
Dont worry our corrupt government will take care of us…
Our government is exactly who I’m prepared to engage with to preserve our rights. I’m not buying the china , Russia BS , it’s our own government who is the most corrupt.

Here’s one for Trad - why is it that this country has never been invaded?

Answer-
Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto : "You cannot invade mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind each blade of grass."

Thank god and the forefathers for 2A

 

[marburg]

Yes I do. If we aren’t, then they could take our guns away. But that point has been backed up by the Supreme Court.

But I also don’t think 7 days infringes too badly. We have to give up somewhere to sound reasonable so that reasonable non-gun people will back us up with votes. All we have to do is plan ahead. I can do that. I already have more than 1 gun per person in my household.

This attitude is what happened in California. There are no reasonable anti-gun people.

 

[txhunter58]

This attitude is what happened in California. There are no reasonable anti-gun people.

If you read further in the thread you will see that I have changed my mind on this issue. Once I actually thought about if Texas changed “instant background checks” to 7 days, I would be pissed. When I’m wrong, I say so. 7 day period def infringes.

However, it’s not the anti-gun people we have to be reasonable with and convince. It is the average US citizen that doesn’t hunt or own a firearm that we have to seem reasonable to. They aren’t anti-gun.

And California is a lost cause. I really think they need to secede.

 

[sbeard4]

Anyone can say they stand ready to serve, truth is most never do. I guess that’s why we are called one percenters. I’m just curious about the context of what was meant by a well regulated militia. I’m sure you’re not aware of this but up until WWII the federal army would mostly be deactivated between conflicts leaving the defense of the country up to well regulated militias or the national guard. But today we have the largest full time standing Army in the world, so we really don’t need a bunch of people showing up to take on the British. In fact some of you guys are probably more of a liability to the safety of our professional soldiers versus being the useful assets you think you are. You were concerned about me giving a yes or no answer about the 2nd amendment. My answer is yes all citizens of this country do have the right to bear arms. I was just asking about what you guys thought about the phrasing of what a well regulated militia means. Was it used in a context that doesn’t really apply anymore? And if so does it need to be updated to today’s threat level or the need of national defense. LOL you guys get triggered every time someone asks a question. It’s like some of you guys think that democracy and freedom means don’t ask questions and just think what you’re told to think. Some of you need to learn to be less sensitive and more open to discussion. I don’t know why I try to even talk to you guys anymore, there is a reason why this NM page has far less active members than it used to. Seems like most people have just moved on and I guess you can troll me out the door.

as has been pointed out here twice and by the courts numerous times, The second amendment is not focused on the well regulated militia. please read