Tyranny of the ATF

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

Again, the publishing of the Federalist Papers followed the drafting and signing of the Constitution, quit trying to argue they had any impact on it's signing.

Everything else is just speculation on your part, which you're welcome to, but I'll not waste my time on arguing what amounts to little more than your point of view.

---

The Federalist Papers was written way before the Bill of Rights & the 2nd Amendment was written. I made no such claim it was written before the Constitution, and in fact specified the purpose was to support it’s ratification. You asked for historical evidence to support my claim (not really mine as it’s common knowledge) that the 2nd Amendment was shaped by the events that happened at Lexington & Concord, and I gave just one.

Again I implore you to educate us all why the 2nd Amendment was written, any historical context, and for what purpose. If I understood you correctly in the past, you believe it gives power to the government to regulate firearms? We would all really like to hear you expand upon that claim if so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppressed Poet

The Federalist Papers was written way before the Bill of Rights & the 2nd Amendment was written. I made no such claim it was written before the Constitution, and in fact specified the purpose was to support it’s ratification. You asked for historical evidence to support my claim (not really mine as it’s common knowledge) that the 2nd Amendment was shaped by the events that happened at Lexington & Concord, and I gave just one.

Again I implore you to educate us all why the 2nd Amendment was written, any historical context, and for what purpose. If I understood you correctly in the past, you believe it gives power to the government to regulate firearms? We would all really like to hear you expand upon that claim if so.

---

If you go back a few pages, you'll see him talk about how the 2nd is for protection against wildlife. :rofl:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Methais

If you go back a few pages, you'll see him talk about how the 2nd is for protection against wildlife. :rofl:

---

Ahh yes. So Seran, the 2nd Amendment was written to allow us some protection against Big Foot? Is that your position?

Quote:

---

No vessels of war shall be kept up in time of peace, by any state, except such number only, as shall be deemed necessary by the united states, in congress assembled, for the defence of such state, or its trade; nor shall any body of forces be kept up, by any state, in time of peace, except such number only as, in the judgment of the united states, in congress assembled, shall be deemed requisite to garrison the forts necessary for the defence of such state; but every state shall always keep up a well regulated and disciplined militia, sufficiently armed and accoutred, and shall provide and constantly have ready for use, in public stores, a due number of field pieces and tents, and a proper quantity of arms, ammunition, and camp equipage.

Article Vi, paragraph IV Articles of Confederation

---

Armaments held publicly as necessary for every state to keep up a well regulated and disciplined militia. The original articles creating our union as the precursor to the Constitution was clear that the right to bear arms belonged to well regulated militias. This was also written expressly in the Constitution and the common interpretation until a bunch of conservative hillbillies decided to misinterpret the test in 2008.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

Armaments held publicly as necessary for every state to keep up a well regulated and disciplined militia. The original articles creating our union as the precursor to the Constitution was clear that the right to bear arms belonged to well regulated militias. This was also written expressly in the Constitution and the common interpretation until a bunch of conservative hillbillies decided to misinterpret the test in 2008.

---

Gotcha. So you reject the definition of the words militia and well-regulated in the time & context they were written into the Constitution.

I don’t suppose any evidence presented could ever cause you to rethink that position?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

Armaments held publicly as necessary for every state to keep up a well regulated and disciplined militia. The original articles creating our union as the precursor to the Constitution was clear that the right to bear arms belonged to well regulated militias. This was also written expressly in the Constitution and the common interpretation until a bunch of conservative hillbillies decided to misinterpret the test in 2008.

---

So you don't believe in the 3 branches of government?

Breaking news on the ATF pistol brace rule, a federal judge created a nationwide injunction against the ATF from enforcing the new rule.

Federal Judge Blocks ATF From Arresting Millions Of Pistol Brace Owners
https://thefederalist.com/2023/11/09...-brace-owners/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppa Hobbit Mage

So you don't believe in the 3 branches of government?

---

He never has.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppressed Poet

Gotcha. So you reject the definition of the words militia and well-regulated in the time & context they were written into the Constitution.

I don’t suppose any evidence presented could ever cause you to rethink that position?

---

I, the Supreme Court and Federal/State agencies prior to 2008, constitutional scholars and a host of others reject your fabrication that a militia refers to a single individual that cannot be regulated. Just waiting for a few conservative justices to lose their seats so the mockery of constitutional law passed in Heller and a few other notable rejections of stare decisis are overturned.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

I, the Supreme Court and Federal/State agencies prior to 2008, constitutional scholars and a host of others reject your fabrication that a militia refers to a single individual that cannot be regulated. Just waiting for a few conservative justices to lose their seats so the mockery of constitutional law passed in Heller and a few other notable rejections of stare decisis are overturned.

---

Fair enough and good luck with that.

In the meantime, I’d appreciate if you tell your freedom hating cronies to at least respect those decisions as the law of the land & not violate their oath of office until at such time the law changes. I don’t always agree with every law, but as a citizen I do my best to follow them. It’s not cool to call an entire branch of government illegitimate. One might even say such rhetoric is…insurrectionary…