Man deemed criminally insane arrested with van full of guns

[TrollBuster9090]

73. Yes, I've run into that, too. Right here on DU. I don't have the link (like others are requesting)

but I once posted an OP about this, citing the MILITIA ACTS of 1782, which (apparently) defined what the Founding Fathers considerd to be a MILITIA. (Apparently, based on the fact that Washington signed it into law while Jefferson was in his cabinet.) Thus, there was no need to argue about whether or not the founders were referring to EVERYBODY when they mentioned a 'well regulated militia' in the 2nd Amendment. They actually DEFINED what they thought a Militia was in the Militia Acts, and they were referring to the official STATE MILITIA reserves, which could be called up by State Governors, and which would be ultimately under the control of the President. The Militia Acts also MANDATED that all military aged men had to buy a musket, powder horn, belt, coat etc. to serve in it. They were NOT referring to everybody being armed to the teeth for the purpose of overthrowing their own government the first time it passes a law they're not happy with. (That thesis was then tested during the Whiskey Rebellion, when Washington called up the reserves, under the Militia Act, and used it to put down a TAX REBELLION. If it had been the Founders' intent to give people the ability to fight against their own government over what they considered to be tyrannical government overreach, this would have been a perfect example of it, and you'd expect Washington, Jefferson, Madison etc. to come down on the side of the rebels. But the opposite happened, and they sided with the Government.)

I got hit with many negative comments, often referring to quotes in The Federalist Papers (because you can't find anything in the actual DoI or Constitution about the definition or purpose of 'a Militia'...so you have to fall back on other documents the Founders wrote to speculate about what their 'intent' was when they wrote that).

I went through a few rounds of people quoting things in the Federalist Papers, all of which I was able to prove were incorrect when you look at the whole text of what was written. But finally one guy managed to find one that was written by Madison which hints at this opinion, where Madison claims that the the examples of tyrannical kingdoms of Europe wouldn't have been possible if the citizens were allowed to arm themselves etc. That one I couldn't dispute as having another meaning. But almost all the others can be disputed.

So, you're right. Those attitudes even exist here on DU.