Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

jmg257

(11,996 posts)

12. If they wanted the people to get arms from an armory, Congress

Reply to Gorp (Reply #11)

Sat Feb 16, 2013, 07:16 PM

Feb 2013

would have included that clause in the first Militia Acts...and likely even agree to have the govt supply them. Instead they decided the people would provide their own arms and accoutrements - including ammo, for militia service. They knew that if the govt armed the militias, they could just as easy disarm them, and so lay the pretext for a standing army.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

14 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Something I've never quite understood about the Second Amendment [View all] OceanEcosystem Feb 2013 OP

Yeah, I've always wondered where the outrage is for ownership of surface to air missile launchers. JaneyVee Feb 2013 #1

It's been co-opted by a weird cult of guns that was never intended. DirkGently Feb 2013 #2

Don't beat around the bush, man! Tell us what you really think! Robb Feb 2013 #3

Well Said. (nt) Paladin Feb 2013 #4

You are really screwing the words there davidn3600 Feb 2013 #5

'bearing arms' usually carried a martial connontation. jmg257 Feb 2013 #6

Even as a "gun" person, i think the 9th has more bearing than the 2nd Recursion Feb 2013 #7

No one envisioned what the NRA argues for. DirkGently Feb 2013 #8

There is no greater threat to gun owners' rights today than the NRA Recursion Feb 2013 #9

Considering they asserted they had the right to get rid of their current government dkf Feb 2013 #10

I have a different take on it. The use of armories is ancient. Gorp Feb 2013 #11

If they wanted the people to get arms from an armory, Congress jmg257 Feb 2013 #12

Interesting take. But in the time they needed the armories for militia weapons. Gorp Feb 2013 #14

Read Heller and Miller hack89 Feb 2013 #13