A well regulated militia being necessary

So how are retards 'active and competent'?
Do you need to pass a medical, PT Test and handling drills to prove it?

They thin themselves out before 16

Translation:
>I think I'm better than them and therefore entitled to more rights even though I'm secretly as dumbshit as everyone else.

Braced for triggering

Pretty sure people with mental handicaps aren't allowed to purchase firearms.

No. It's pretty simple. The amendment does not state "the right of the militia to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" it states the right of the people. See DC v Heller: The Supreme court has affirmed the right to keep and bear arms is a right of the people, unconnected with militia or military service.

Regulated as in a regular digestion. Not as in controlled.

All nine members of the Heller Court began by accepting the essential core of originalist theory: The Constitution is a written document that was publicly adopted as law. It therefore means what its words meant to the relevant public audience at the time of adoption. Originalist jurisprudence is the effort to use this interpretive theory to decide particular questions about what the Constitution requires and forbids.

Justice Scalia’s argument is as follows. The term “the right of the people” in the operative clause presumptively implies an individual and private right, just as it does in the First and Fourth Amendments. The terms used in the other key phrase in that clause, “keep and bear arms,” were frequently used in non-military senses, so the operative clause does not imply that the right to arms is confined to military purposes. The right to keep and bear arms, moreover, was already well established before the Bill of Rights was adopted, and had never been restricted to military contexts. The Second Amendment’s preface, according to Justice Scalia, explains why this pre-existing right was codified in the Constitution, but does not change the nature of the right that was thus codified.

the 2A doesnt apply to militias, it applies to the people, the militia part is the qualifier. in todays retard speech it would read
"The militia is like really important for the security of the country, because of this, in order to have a militia, everyone's right to own any weapon shall not be infringed."
this topic has been discussed ad nauseam and the only people who think the 2a applies to only militias are gun grabbing retards. even liberal history and legal professors agree it applies to the people.

Are retards etc officially then not part of 'the people'?
Based Scotus if so - T4 Mk2

Attached: 220px-EuthanasiePropaganda.jpg (220x281, 21K)

>All citizens over the age of 16 must have a military rifle and have a certain level of proficiency with it
>All households containing >2 but All households containing >4 persons must maintain and be able to operate one GPMG for every 4 persons
>For every 200 residents the county must provide a .50 MG
>For every 5,000 residents the county must provide one SAM and one ATGM
>For every 20,000 residents the state must maintain an IFV
>For every 1 mil residents the state must maintain a tank
>For every 3 mil residents the state must maintain one attack helicopter and one utility helicopter
>Coastal states must maintain one patrol boat for every 5 mil residents

That is how you do a well regulated militia lads

The Constitution should only apply to white people

I need you to take a step back, and then literally fuck your own face.

You know that you are wrong. It is clear what the 2A means. You're arguing with yourself.

Actually lower the numbers required for the last three by 90%

OP
No, my question wasn't "does 2A only apply yo a militia" , my question was - if "all the people" have the RKBA under 2A, why don't they all also have the right/responsibility to be part of the Militia if it gets raised?
Retards, cripples, traps, utter nutcases, everybody.

because drawing a line and saying 'you must be this competent to ride the funscoaster is ripe for bullshittery

this, unironically

everyone else ruins nice things with their malarke

Maybe will can add in based rooftop Koreans but that's it!

But the militia already is full of fat retards with guns

Attached: tumblr_mqtr19TIfk1sppmago1_250.gif (225x199, 981K)

Fuck, he's using his gut fat as living bumpstock.
Now the doggo shooters have to try to confiscate all lard

Any and all United States citizens of able body are apart of the unorganized militia by default.

Not really. We turn them away for being stupid and they form their own separate militia. Then they become easy pickings for G-troops and we secure our own territory while they're distracted.

I'm sure that worked out perfectly well for Germany

Attached: 6298fc6db4b24ce2dd9e1a7fa6bb1f46.jpg (1069x1506, 366K)

I mean they literally tried to take over the world.

It would probably have been a lot different if they didn't start invading everyone.

Attached: militia.png (1440x2560, 347K)

Attached: balanced breakfast.jpg (819x783, 162K)

I'll give you that one.

What is it with liberals redefining things to fit their argument?

go back to Jow Forums

What really fucks me up is that every time is see the red version of this I question which one is real.

>So only "Able bodied men age 17 to 45 or women enrolled in the countries military" need to be uninfringed?
Learn to read.

Attached: 1547608333784.png (819x783, 1.03M)

Yes. Every one.
And it’s well regulated because there is a chain of command in said militia.
In the meantime though, said militia still needs its equipment uniinfringed ready to be mustered and sent to fight.

get a load of this retard. you have got to be like 14 years old with this level of flat thinking

I think we should just go with what this idiot is implying though guys. Only guns for white males aged 17-45. All in favor say aye.

>watching YouTube videos, being necessary to the happiness of all NEETS, the right to use Google shall not be infringed
See, this doesn’t mean you can only use Google for YouTube. It means that you can use google for whatever but the reasoning is because YouTube is deemed necessary.

Yeah, yet another reminder that Jow Forums does not belong here

You mean like how you redefined liberal to describe illiberal people and ideas?

>Only guns for white males 17-45
Feel free to take mine then- one round (M193 Ball) at a time

Attached: 1474944266016.jpg (600x646, 25K)

>mfw someone suggests the militia belongs to the State

Does the 2nd amendment not apply to paraplegics?

If the Supreme Court interpreted the Second Amendment as a state right, then all federal prohibition on firearms would be invalid

Attached: 1436479446178.png (446x435, 8K)

Nice try but not really. In modern speak the 2A would read.

A militia made of US citizens is vital to protecting the public interest and securing individual freedom. Thus you have the right to form and be part of well trained and effectively armed private militia. Your rights to privately own and posses contemporary military arms, ammunition, equipment, engage in training and assemble as a militia shall not be regulated nor restricted by any law.

>It would probably have been a lot different if they didn't start invading everyone.

Every time a bunch of white guys get together with guns, somebody ends up getting invaded. And people say the jews are bad...

That's just Insanity.

It's Darwinism. Dump a crate of guns in a chimp enclosure, and you'll have fewer chimps within the week.

>And if so how is it to be well regulated?
>doesn't speak English
What is a prefatory clause. Look up the 18th century definition of "militia."
We already have a well-regulated militia. It's called the military. Also the National Guard.

The right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED because well regulated military bodies exist, and the citizen must be on equal parity with their own military. Because that's how a civil republic optimally works.

I'm convinced that American education is contrived in order to make Americans know absolutely nothing about their history or founding literature.

Now learn English you faggot.

Attached: 6CF4D696-B497-4575-98D2-FBFA80BE31B2.jpg (1024x587, 121K)

Then fucking leave. Nobody asked you to come here. What boat did you come in on? Which immigrant wave are you part of?
Did you think America was founded for shekels? No. You have to go back.

Holy shit you dumbass. They had the word because back then and they would have used it if they intended for your retarded interpretation.

The 2A doesn't give you the right to be armed because there is a military. Heck they didn't even want standing armies (aka a military).

The 2A gives the people the right to form a military outside the control of the government.

white invasion sometimes--and i dare say--usually leads to betterment of the colonised

jews only horde and subvert

This well regulated means it is up and running and fully armed

>O/k, if the 2A shall not be infringed, does that mean that every dribbling retard, lardbeast and muhdickdindu therefore gets to be part of the militia?
1. You purposefully skipped over the part where it says, "the right of the people to keep and bear arms," you disingenuous traitor.
2. The Militia Act of 1903. Every able-bodied man is a militia member by law.
In other words: Fuck you. And kill yourself before you breed.

Attached: dba5zed.jpg (500x373, 77K)

YES, MOTHERFUCKER. FREEDOM IS A TWO WAY STREET.
DON'T LIKE IT? THEN CHOKE ON MY 18-INCH FREEDOM BONER YOU FUCKING KIKE.

>The 2A doesn't give you the right to be armed because there is a military. Heck they didn't even want standing armies (aka a military).
I didn't fucking say that you retarded animal.

>The right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED because well regulated military bodies exist, and the citizen must be on equal parity with their own military.
You literally said it here, tard.

Note that is says "able bodied", not "mentally stable", "intelligent", "jacked", or "white as snow".
law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/246

"Well regulated" applies to the individual just like the right itself. It essentially means "in working order". You are not well regulated as militia if you have no gun, it's unable to fire for whatever reason, you have no ammo for it, and/or you can't hit the broad side of a barn. In the organized militia the state ensures you are well regulated providing weaponry, equipment, training, and munitions. In the unorganized militia that it the duty of the individual militiaman. The unorganized militia, as the name implies, does not have a set structure. Could be Bubba Joe's Realtree brigade put together from is deer camp friends, a cawadooty tacticool structured group, or one guy who goes full Simo in HIS gods damned woods. Shouting about rank to the unorganized is about as relevant as shouting "I MATTER!", nobody cares.

"Well regulated" does not mean how deep the government's cock is in your ass.

>YFW the airshit kids won't be the worst performing militia if there's conflict on American soil
>Millions of people who've never even held a toy gun across the country

Not him, but as long as they can still make a positive contribution, I don't see any issues with it.

I don't live in the States, I just find that opinion insane. Give anyone the right to acquire firearms, no matter the state of said people, because of right written over 200 years ago.

I understand back then why it was written, it was the birth of a nation, something that was never done before, a shot fired that was heard around the world, by a collective of people fighting a tyrant who gave you no option of representation. However there comes a time when you have to say, do we really still need this? Should we not amend things and write new things to progress forward as a civilization? You won, you made a nation, and that nation has now become one of, if not the greatest country in the world, but no let's still give the right to bear arms to anyone even if they are idiots.

I'm not American either, but here's my take on it:
If you want to amend the constitution, THERE'S A WAY TO DO THAT. It has been done multiple times since inception.
THAT'S NOT WHAT THEY'RE DOING.
All they do is pass laws that are UNCONSTITUTIONAL and then the laws GET STRUCK DOWN.
You want to change it? Then show them the fucking votes! If you DON'T HAVE THE VOTES, then you can POUND SAND. Taking away firearms when the LAW OF THE LAND is very fucking clear, YOU ARE IN THE WRONG.
If the local police steal your property, I don't care if it's your TV, your car, your guns or anything else. Robbers get shot. Telling cops to got steal peoples property is telling them to go die. So unless you want to volunteer going door to door, invading the homes of people to take their guns, then you can fuck off.
Clear as mud?

what is it about "idiots" that makes you think they dont deserve the right to defend themselves the same way everyone else does?

Airshit's better than nothing I guess. But that would still only train people to start engaging at a far closer range than they should have, and treating bushes as hard cover.

Muscle memory is important.

b&r

>let's still give the right to bear arms
You don't give people rights; they just have them. The Second Amendment doesn't grant the right to keep and bear arms; it just acknowledges that right and enshrines it in law. Every single person the world over has that right, whether their governments honor it or not.
Do not confuse rights with civil liberties.

fpwp

>Give anyone the right to acquire firearms
No one "gives" rights, except God.

If God gives rights, guess I'll kill my brother for writing left handed. Stone my daughter to death for adultery, or slay my neighbour for eating the flesh of a pig too....