Replies

Will this obvious abuse of power in the confiscation of this man's firearms be the "shot heard around the world"?

I wonder if those who predict the coming CW-II will be coming to this guy's aid? Or maybe they can't get the time off work..........

"...Or maybe can’t get the time off work..."

You are precisely correct, that is why that whole Civil War II yammering is such silly nonsense.
If police cannot get enough firearm charges to stick, my bet is child porn has already been planted on his computer as an insurance policy.

A freeper posted a month or more ago and explained how one thought on the 2nd Amendment was that the purpose of a “well-regulated Milita” was to provide a check against a large federal army. Prior to Lexington/Concord the British had taken powder from a town. That town and county quickly dissolved their British militia and replaced it with a state militia (with all of the former members just reinstated!) But - they trained weekly, men too poor to have weapons or munitions were provided it, and they were ORGANIZED. (The minutemen were created at this time - just 6 months or so before Lexington/Concord).

Below is a wiki excerpt that corresponds to that freeper’s thoughts on it. Of course without a local, well organized militia, we are all just separate citizens. And when our guns and ammo are taken away, we become nutcases with an “arsenal”. Or we are a felon that broke some arbitrary law with a shotgun barrel an inch too short. (Or in some states, did not have a gun registered, or not in a safe, or with a bipod, or....) And no - I don’t believe that the state’s National Guard come close to being a militia.

Wiki Excerpt:

While both James Monroe and John Adams supported the Constitution being ratified, its most influential framer was James Madison. In Federalist No. 46, Madison wrote how a federal army could be kept in check by state militias, “a standing army ... would be opposed [by] a militia.” He argued that state militias “would be able to repel the danger” of a federal army, “It may well be doubted, whether a militia thus circumstanced could ever be conquered by such a proportion of regular troops.” He confidently contrasted the federal government of the United States to the European kingdoms, which he contemptuously described as “afraid to trust the people with arms.” He assured his fellow citizens that they need never fear their government because “besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition”.