General Discussion

Straw Man

(6,937 posts)

44. Guy Fawkes ...

Reply to Angel Martin (Reply #21)

Wed Jun 22, 2016, 11:13 PM

Jun 2016

... and the Gunpowder Plot?

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

81 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The would be mass killer back when the 2nd Amendment was conceived.... [View all] WillParkinson Jun 2016 OP

This is what the 1st amendment was written for. former9thward Jun 2016 #1

When are you going to drop the act? ProudToBeBlueInRhody Jun 2016 #7

I will use speech on the internet to correct your error regarding 18th-Century weapons appal_jack Jun 2016 #10

You're apparently confused as to who you are replying to ProudToBeBlueInRhody Jun 2016 #11

You're apparently confused about the nature of DU... appal_jack Jun 2016 #16

You're also free to not make any lick of sense ProudToBeBlueInRhody Jun 2016 #17

"all the best people are entirely bonkers" appal_jack Jun 2016 #20

That particular quote was NOT from Alice... Herman4747 Jun 2016 #53

True. Best suitable graphic I could find, though. nt appal_jack Jun 2016 #71

The rate of fire of the Girandoni non-firearm was...? jberryhill Jun 2016 #27

That would depend on how many pre charged reservoirs the shooter was carrying. Marengo Jun 2016 #69

There was also the puckle gun... beevul Jun 2016 #28

and pintobean Jun 2016 #12

No one's arguing that. treestar Jun 2016 #19

Doesnt translate to a good metaphor at all. stevenleser Jun 2016 #23

Nice theory. former9thward Jun 2016 #70

It was a sad dodge, not clever at all. Rex Jun 2016 #75

Privately-owned artillery units were not unknown during the Revolution jmowreader Jun 2016 #79

Message auto-removed Name removed Jun 2016 #67

"The administration claims the Orlando killer was radicalized by the internet." Rex Jun 2016 #74

A sword would have been most effective at close range in 1787. leveymg Jun 2016 #2

What were muskets and bayonets in that time? Marengo Jun 2016 #4

During that era, a soldier or militia member who trained regularly could load and fire 2x a minute. haele Jun 2016 #14

How much of that did you recycle? leveymg Jun 2016 #25

Too bad those militias were made from the body of the people... jmg257 Jun 2016 #39

Are you familiar with the Militia Act of 1792? jmg257 Jun 2016 #40

Yes, every able-bodied male citizen was a member of the militia. haele Jun 2016 #42

Unless you were enrolled in the militia, you couldn't keep and bear 8-pounders. leveymg Jun 2016 #47

Interesting - (though a bit irrelevant) What laws mandated you couldn't own 8-pounders? jmg257 Jun 2016 #50

As a matter of law, adult males were enrolled in militia, as a matter of practice, cannon were leveymg Jun 2016 #51

Agreed. The people were to supply themselves with personal arms, jmg257 Jun 2016 #52

That's how I read it, as well. But, there's an additional twist. leveymg Jun 2016 #54

Wouldn't that reasoning sarisataka Jun 2016 #55

It does seem the creation of the NG was a usurption of power - the Congress was given powers jmg257 Jun 2016 #58

Is that what will allow us sarisataka Jun 2016 #60

Yes, if enough of the people demand it - then it would come down to the supreme court jmg257 Jun 2016 #63

You are correct sarisataka Jun 2016 #64

Yes - agreed, it is sad...well-intentioned as it may be. nt jmg257 Jun 2016 #65

Tell that to Dwight D. Eisenhower. leveymg Jun 2016 #59

"the 2nd lost its reason for being and relevance half a century ago." NOW we are talking! jmg257 Jun 2016 #56

Look up "Little Rock, September 24, 1957", the date Eisenhower nationalized the Ark Nat'l Guard leveymg Jun 2016 #57

Former F&I reenactor here. I put together a RN land detachment impression... Marengo Jun 2016 #66

I used to do needle, pillow, and crochet lace along with tatting for 15th to 18th cent costumes. haele Jun 2016 #68

You're incorrect regarding private ownership of cannons. Just reading posts Jun 2016 #6

Yep. Private ownership of cannons was legal, but uncommon due to their expense. Xithras Jun 2016 #13

As there was no other source than Army surplus, one had to request purchase from the Gov't leveymg Jun 2016 #49

Are you familiar with the fact that the US Government registered these armed merchantships? leveymg Jun 2016 #48

LOL. If they do that they might learn about privateers and pirates! Rex Jun 2016 #77

Or how the US privatized foreign policy and legalized piracy 225 years before Blackwater leveymg Jun 2016 #80

I bet some people would pass out if they knew foreign nationals fought in Uncle Sam's army! Rex Jun 2016 #81

The cartoons accuracy evidently has some vexed. Rex Jun 2016 #76

Could you imagine Tony Montana in those times? Initech Jun 2016 #3

...you said, exercising your 1st Amendment rights with 21st Century technology. Just reading posts Jun 2016 #5

I keep trying to load bullets into the Internet Wednesdays Jun 2016 #8

you think this is some great argument treestar Jun 2016 #18

No, it actually is a good argument. Shandris Jun 2016 #22

It's a terrible argument. You couldn't own a cannon back then which shows how even then, the stevenleser Jun 2016 #24

Nonsense. beevul Jun 2016 #29

Letters of marque and reprisal reinforce my point. Do you know what did it take to get one? stevenleser Jun 2016 #30

No, they really don't. beevul Jun 2016 #31

Yes they really do. The right to bear arms is a personal right, not a right of a ship. stevenleser Jun 2016 #33

But it DOES hold. beevul Jun 2016 #36

The right? Straw Man Jun 2016 #43

Bullshit, canons, on merchant ships or carts, were privately owned. Who told you this horseshit? n/t X_Digger Jun 2016 #34

So, let me get this straight.... Just reading posts Jun 2016 #32

Nope. An amendment that was meant to be restrictive was erroneously compared to one that wasnt. stevenleser Jun 2016 #35

They're both meant to be restrictive, of government... beevul Jun 2016 #37

Neither the 1st nor the 2nd Amendment restrict rights, they both protect them. Just reading posts Jun 2016 #38

The whole purpose of the 2nd was to ensure the effeciency of the militias. jmg257 Jun 2016 #41

Back to 10th grade civics with you. X_Digger Jun 2016 #72

This was the rapid-fire assault weapon back then Crabby Appleton Jun 2016 #9

This message was self-deleted by its author jmg257 Jun 2016 #15

mass murder 17th Century style Angel Martin Jun 2016 #21

Guy Fawkes ... Straw Man Jun 2016 #44

yes nt Angel Martin Jun 2016 #45

Excellent underpants Jun 2016 #26

Post removed Post removed Jun 2016 #46

Historically mass killers were poisoners Sen. Walter Sobchak Jun 2016 #61

It says nothing about ammunition, so I say ban it and all components. alarimer Jun 2016 #62

Hey now there's a novel idea! jmg257 Jun 2016 #73

NRA survey says Rex Jun 2016 #78