@izzythepush,
Oh God, this thread again.
Look it's simple. Let's have a reread of the second amendment.
Quote: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.
https://www.hiddendominion.com/a-well-regulated-militia/
Quote:“Well regulated”, however, meant something completely different in 18th century US.
Back then, nothing was “regulated” in our sense of the word. There were no actual regulations like we know of them today.
Well regulated meant it functioned well. A “well regulated” business was one that operated efficiently. Consider that a well regulated gun was one that worked right.
So, a militia that works right, not as you suspect, an overly regulated militia. We have an example of this, the minutemen. Not troops, not state employed, regular citizens that could be armed within a minute (if your gun has to be in a safe, you cannot be armed in a minute; if your gun isn't allowed to be openly carried without also searching the house for your permit, you can't be armed in a minute; and if you cannot even leave the house with it as in some states, the fight is already lost). What are these minutemen for? Well, it should be obvious. Not for hunting, for legitimate threats.
Quote:A well regulated militia would be a group of people who could unite together well and act as a cohesive unit. To protect against threats. Foreign or domestic.
Most people don’t realize this divergence in the language. Well regulated militia is nothing more than a group of hardy people that have guns that could come together and perform well. It does not mean government regulated or managed. It never did.
A foreign threat would be an army about to invade its homes and shores in the middle of the night. Example, Saudi troops dropping from planes, so one screams "The Saudis are coming! The Saudis are coming." A domestic threat? Well it could come from civilian or state sources. Some group of Neo-Nazis might try to take over government ( in which case, again you have to fight the government) or just kill blacks, Jews, and gays. Or the government itself could send SWAT teams after people minding their business and paying their taxes, because they don't like the fact that for instance they are refusing to take the (*cough* poison) vaccine. You see, an unarmed populace cannot say "over my dead body" without it rather quickly and easily happening just that way. A man with a shotgun next to his door can say, "You'll have to speak up there. My double-barrelled shotgun had trouble hearing you."
The reason "kids are shooting up the schools"? Btw, we almost never have a live shot of these events. Not that they don't happen. They are ruthlessly controlled murder campaigns. But they are typically staged with "actor" killing people (usually either a "teen" or some Arab, depending on whether the government wants usto fight in the Middle East for oil today, or just wants us to hand over our weapons). It's a snuff film where innocent people are blown to bits, and then crisis actors (you'll often see the same "cast" of "witnesses") try to ramp up the drama. It's sick. And what's even sicker is that it convinces alot of people to willingly hand over their only protection.
https://newspunch.com/most-american-shootings-are-staged-events-claims-researcher/
In UK, you have "fee" health care. Everyone pays the fee in their taxes. Only not everyone pays taxes cuz they're too poor (exempt) or too rich (weaseling out of taxes, through loopholes). What this really means is that some people get "free" healthcare at the expense of others bearing the brunt for smokers, the obese, and people who tried to jump off a bridge and drown themselves only to mangle their body.
In UK, you've not only handed over all guns, but the powers that be weren't satisfied. I heard somewhere that this cucked nation was about ready to hand over its kitchen knives as well. Whatcha gonna cut your chicken curry into nice neat chunks with now, a butter knife?
Women can have abortions. As a subscriber to ACLJ, I signed a petition to stop Roe vs Wade, but I have zero interest in preventing certain states from pursuing abortions. California can depopulate its own state all it wants. I support abortions in leftist states. But I don't support my state being one of those. On the other hand, national abortion on demand is an atrocity. There will always be pockets of women doing back-alley stuff, but they should be aware that it's illehal because there is inherent risk even in legit clinics. Meanwhile, the UK acts like they did some ******* great thing here, and I'm tempted to draw comparison between a baby being proud after taking a giant dump on a chair, and these policies.
Lastly, let's talk about the UK. I visited it years ago with my dad. We had hidden traffic cameras everywhere, billing people for speeding. My dad didn't even notice he was "caught" until the passive aggressive little device sent a ticket to our home exchange. That's ******* big state right there. I liked the small stores with fresh meats and such, but Ireland had stuff like that with no cameras everywhere. Or at least less or them. In UK, they were all over the place. "The silent policeman," they called it. Yeah, I prefer police to actually pull me over and tell me that I was speeding.
You can keep all your "progress". I love the US. That's legit why.
