The .gov want you easier to kill!

Bailey Boat said:
Reading comprehension, read it, word for word and get back to us....
Click to expand...
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.

As I read that, I see infringed.

act so as to limit or undermine (something); encroach on.

meaning the government may not encroach or limit the people from keeping and using arms.

Meaning all laws limiting arms of the people are unconstitutional.


Then there is this:
https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2016/06/30/what-does-the-word-arms-mean-in-the-2nd-amendment/



In 1755 Dr. Johnson’s Dictionary of the English Language was first published. It defined “arms” as “weapons of offence, or armour of defence.”

This would include body armor. If private citizenry were encouraged to own anything from ships of war to cannons and artillery, how could that not include body armor? I disagree with you completely.
 
Bailey Boat said:
Is says no such thing.... You may want to interpret it that way but that's not what it says....And the road to hell is paved with intentions...
Click to expand...
Here’a a few samples:

"f circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little, if at all, inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow-citizens. This appears to me the only substitute that can be devised for a standing army, and the best possible security against it, if it should exist."
- Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 28, January 10, 1788

"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every country in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops."
- Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution, October 10, 1787

“The militia of these free commonwealths, entitled and accustomed to their arms, when compared with any possible army, must be tremendous and irresistible. Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American … the unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.”
-Tenche Coxe, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788

If you need more then do your own research.

Terry
 
Bailey Boat said:
Ya'll can BS and over quote all you want but when armor is banned let's see you stand up with your "interpretations".....
Click to expand...
You said read it and get back to us. I did. I provided evidence for my argument. I didn't see you give an argument that it isn't in there. You waved your hands in the air and basically said, "who cares, the government will do what it wants." If we are going to go down that road, the government will govern and we have no rights.

Just because the government does something, doesn't mean it was right. There have been plenty of overturned government actions that have been determined to be overreaches.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HMP
Climberman said:
"who cares, the government will do what it wants." If we are going to go down that road, the government will govern and we have no rights.

Just because the government does something, doesn't mean it was right. There have been plenty of overturned government actions that have been determined to be overreaches.
Click to expand...

And tell me what part of "The government will do what it wants" you don't understand. JFC, look at where we are TODAY and tell me they won't do whatever they want!!
 
I have a pair of plate carriers just in case. I call them my life insurance policies, they are there in case SHTF and I need to get my family out of Durham and somewhere safe. Wearing them hurts no one, nor does it make me a threat. Its pretty gross there's people in a firearm forum so excited about the thought of government banning them. Does boot polish taste that great?
 
The gov won't know whether or not I might have body armor until it's too late. Because if I have to put on body armor to leave my house, that means that a shooting Civil war has already started.
 
SPST said:
The gov won't know whether or not I might have body armor until it's too late. Because if I have to put on body armor to leave my house, that means that a shooting Civil war has already started.
Click to expand...

Depends on your spot on the confiscation list. If you are early they may come toss your house well before any shooting has started.
 
Last edited:
I try to be a peaceful man and try to treat others as I wish to be treated, regardless of race, creed or color or any of the other "choices" of lifestyle anyone assumes for themselves. Leave me alone and I leave you alone. However, I and many other veterans on here have seen the horrors of what happens to an unarmed populace - whether in Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq or a myriad of other places in the world. It is not pretty. It will make you throw up at the horrors of what one human can do to another human. When there is no retribution for unchecked destruction then the blood-letting just grows and grows. It's all about keeping the power of the ruler/king/tyrant and the "elites". What, it seems, the elites have forgotten is that when peaceable people have no other choice and nothing left to lose then their retribution will be swift and powerful. And we know who those elites are and where they live. Our elected leaders may surround themselves with police or soldiers at our expense with our tax money, but when the uprising begins then the money stops. Look at the recent dictators who had millions and billions of dollars of gold hidden away, but still died alone and their gold confiscated. It's no wonder that .gov wants us disarmed and defenseless and herded like sheep into controlled environments. "Do as we say -it's for your own safety, your own good." Once you get people accustomed to "doing as they say" it's easier to control a larger group without expending too much effort. Think of the income tax - we need this and it's only 1% (when it started). We'll even make it easy for you to pay it by taking it from you before you actually get it. Then more taxes, more restrictions, more regulations, more of everything. Little by little we become more and more accustomed to having our Rights to Life, LIBERTY, and the pursuit of happiness taken away by .gov and given away to "others". Soon and very soon we shall all have to witness what shouldn't have to be seen. We shall have to do what should never have to be done. I pray to God daily that this too shall pass and we don't have to drink from that cup.
 
James said:
Depends on your spot on the confiscation list. If you are early they may come toss your house well before any shooting has started.
Click to expand...
How do they know who is on a "confiscation" list? I didn't know that you had to register body armor if you bought it? How do they know who has it or doesn't? maybe I should go out and buy some to see if I have to register for it?
 
SPST said:
How do they know who is on a "confiscation" list? I didn't know that you had to register body armor if you bought it? How do they know who has it or doesn't? maybe I should go out and buy some to see if I have to register for it?
Click to expand...
I am referring to the generic gun/magazine confiscation. If you bought a gun from a dealer you are in a database. If you bought anything from a gun store with a credit card you are in a database. Obviously if you buy your armor online or with a card you will be in a database.

Confiscations are one of the more likely things to set off this civil war you speak of.
 
Last edited:
Hesco and RMA are good. General consensus of people who wear armor is AR500 steel is not great. It is heavy and has spalling issues. Ceramic plates can be heavy too but those in combination with HDPE is best . Whatever you pick get a good plate carrier. If your plate carrier costs 40 bucks it is not a good plate carrier. I got two plates and and carrier on a sale at AR500 for 169 bucks one time. My oldest boy wore it to a class. He made it about an hour before taking it off. The heavier the plates the more important a good carrier is.
 
James said:
"Arms" includes body armor. Please point to the language in the constitution that gives the federal government the authority to ban body armor.
Click to expand...

They don't need your "authorization" or your "permission" They'll just DO it. Just like they are restricting our freedoms TODAY.....this minute, right NOW.
 
I read today that there are more guns than people in the United States (at least 400 million in circulation for a population of 330 million).

And that in just the first six months of 2020, approximately 19 million firearms have been sold, which alone represents more than one firearm for every 20 Americans.

I'm feeling much better now ...
 
JT said:
I read today that there are more guns than people in the United States (at least 400 million in circulation for a population of 330 million).

And that in just the first six months of 2020, approximately 19 million firearms have been sold, which alone represents more than one firearm for every 20 Americans.

I'm feeling much better now ...
Click to expand...


blk_molon_helmet_fnt_logo_edited-1_1200x.jpg
 
Bailey Boat said:
And tell me what part of "The government will do what it wants" you don't understand. JFC, look at where we are TODAY and tell me they won't do whatever they want!!
Click to expand...
It’s evident nothing is sacred, even the constitution in 2020. If Trump is defeated in November there will be severe limits on gun ownership forever.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom