Quote from: quiller on July 23, 2016, 03:10:45 AM
Detroit, Chicago, Baltimore, Washington DC....

Gee. All those Democrat cities with the black-on-black violence that the leftist media ignores....

libs are not after the guns there, those guns belong to gangs. The libs want OUR guns, WE are the ones who do not need a militia.      Yea, just what we need, brown shirts run by libs, what could go wrong.

Quote from: s3779m on July 23, 2016, 03:57:59 AM
libs are not after the guns there, those guns belong to gangs. The libs want OUR guns, WE are the ones who do not need a militia.      Yea, just what we need, brown shirts run by libs, what could go wrong.

'Coming to a Place Near You'

QuoteDetroit, Chicago, Baltimore, Washington DC....

Quote from: Gunbunny42 on July 22, 2016, 08:23:36 PM

The borders need more attention no doubt but I'm not sure unorganized milita is the way to go about it. Out of curiosity what other areas of the country you think need a milita?

I don't trust the current occupant but I don't think we need a milita as present, reguardless of whos in the white house.

This is kind of a silly argument, kind of like claiming I only need a seatbelt when I know there's going to be an accident.
Our Founders saw the 2nd as not only a Right, but a responsibility.
Not everyone should be in a militia, but by God, everyone should be exercising their Right of ownership, to not own a gun is akin to not voting.

Quote from: Steve,SPHR on July 22, 2016, 03:04:15 PM

As I described on the other thread I have.


Yet when President Obama called for a civilian volunteer corps he was labeled a dictator.


so which is it?

Under Obama this would be nothing more than a leftist brain washing effort.

Quote from: s3779m on July 23, 2016, 03:57:59 AM
libs are not after the guns there, those guns belong to gangs. The libs want OUR guns, WE are the ones who do not need a militia.      Yea, just what we need, brown shirts run by libs, what could go wrong.

"Leftist diversity advocates and multiculturalists are right to argue that people of all races, religions and cultures should be equal in the eyes of the law. But their argument borders on idiocy when they argue that one set of cultural values cannot be judged superior to another and that to do so is Eurocentrism. That's unbridled nonsense. Ask a diversity/multiculturalism advocate: Is forcible female genital mutilation, as practiced in nearly 30 sub-Saharan African and Middle Eastern countries, a morally equivalent cultural value?" —Walter Williams

Are we supposed to lower ourselves, just be be equal?

Quote from: quiller on July 23, 2016, 03:10:45 AM
Detroit, Chicago, Baltimore, Washington DC....

Gee. All those Democrat cities with the black-on-black violence that the leftist media ignores....

How would that even work? What would their responsibles be or who would keep an eye on them? These are questions I never heard answered outside some vague " They're sort it out" and frankly I don't have that much fate in my follow man.

Quote from: quiller on July 23, 2016, 03:08:36 AM
This keeps getting better the more you admit to, Not-a-gun-owner-but-you-MIGHT-someday.....

Become a responsible gun owner. THEN tell us what we can and cannot do in armed and polite America.

I was in the army as a 13 bravo for four years buddy. I'm no stranger to guns, I merely can't buy one at present. Owing a weapon doesn't suddenly make you a competent militia man. Thanks for jumping to conclusions by the way.

Quote from: Solar on July 23, 2016, 04:45:35 AM
This is kind of a silly argument, kind of like claiming I only need a seatbelt when I know there's going to be an accident.
Our Founders saw the 2nd as not only a Right, but a responsibility.
Not everyone should be in a militia, but by God, everyone should be exercising their Right of ownership, to not own a gun is akin to not voting.

No but you shouldn't buy a seat belt if you don't need a car.

I never disputed our right to carry arms just the need for unwarranted militias.

Quote from: Gunbunny42 on July 23, 2016, 06:38:14 PM
How would that even work? What would their responsibles be or who would keep an eye on them? These are questions I never heard answered outside some vague " They're sort it out" and frankly I don't have that much fate in my follow man.

I was in the army as a 13 bravo for four years buddy. I'm no stranger to guns, I merely can't buy one at present. Owing a weapon doesn't suddenly make you a competent militia man. Thanks for jumping to conclusions by the way.


No but you shouldn't buy a seat belt if you don't need a car.

I never disputed our right to carry arms just the need for unwarranted militias.

An unwarranted militia would qualify as vigilantism, but there will always be a need for a well regulated militia as the Founders clearly described in the Federalist Papers.
It's imperative we have one stronger than our own military. That's the true purpose behind the militia, it's not for personal protection, rather insurance in case of an out of control govt.
It's not an issue I take lightly...

Quote from: Gunbunny42 on July 23, 2016, 06:38:14 PM
How would that even work? What would their responsibles be or who would keep an eye on them? These are questions I never heard answered outside some vague " They're sort it out" and frankly I don't have that much fate in my follow man.

I was in the army as a 13 bravo for four years buddy. I'm no stranger to guns, I merely can't buy one at present. Owing a weapon doesn't suddenly make you a competent militia man. Thanks for jumping to conclusions by the way.


No but you shouldn't buy a seat belt if you don't need a car.

I never disputed our right to carry arms just the need for unwarranted militias.

I'm trying to understand your comment about unwarranted militias.  As clearly stated in the 2nd amendment; a well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state.  Why do you see militias as unwarranted?  Especially with the current climate surrounding gun control.  Not to mention the threat of ISIS and illegals pouring over our borders and you see militias as unwarranted??

Quote from: Solar on July 23, 2016, 06:49:42 PM
An unwarranted militia would qualify as vigilantism, but there will always be a need for a well regulated militia as the Founders clearly described in the Federalist Papers.
It's imperative we have one stronger than our own military. That's the true purpose behind the militia, it's not for personal protection, rather insurance in case of an out of control govt.
It's not an issue I take lightly...

That was exactly my concern from the get. People using the militia clause to justify vigilantism hences my initial suspicion. I do wonder though in what do you mean by having a militia stronger than the regular armed forces? How can militias out muscle a modern technologically advance force by their lonesome?

Quote from: Ms.Independence on July 23, 2016, 06:52:15 PM
I'm trying to understand your comment about unwarranted militias.  As clearly stated in the 2nd amendment; a well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state.  Why do you see militias as unwarranted?  Especially with the current climate surrounding gun control.  Not to mention the threat of ISIS and illegals pouring over our borders and you see militias as unwarranted??

Having militias in of themselves isn't my issue, the Founders certainly didn't have a problem with militias but how is a newly raised militia apparently without at least state government help supposed to fight ISIS or do something about the lib hell holes of Detroit,Baltimore ect? That's what my concern is.

Quote from: Gunbunny42 on July 23, 2016, 09:41:26 PM
That was exactly my concern from the get. People using the militia clause to justify vigilantism hences my initial suspicion. I do wonder though in what do you mean by having a militia stronger than the regular armed forces? How can militias out muscle a modern technologically advance force by their lonesome?

Firstly, the govt is not allowed to post American soldiers on the homeland, unless we were invaded, so it's safe to say a militia could easily out number Homeland Security if they tried top amass an assault against the American people.

QuoteHaving militias in of themselves isn't my issue, the Founders certainly didn't have a problem with militias but how is a newly raised militia apparently without at least state government help supposed to fight ISIS or do something about the lib hell holes of Detroit,Baltimore ect? That's what my concern is.

That's a police matter, not something the militia would get involved in usually. As long as they stay in Detroit.

Quote from: Solar on July 23, 2016, 10:46:53 PM
That's a police matter, not something the militia would get involved in usually. As long as they stay in Detroit.

Any serious effort to curb crime in Michigan begins with changing the state constitution to now permit executions, followed by rigorous application of same until recidivists are extinct and the wanna-be's are cowed. We're a bit late on that militia part; thanks to the Dems the inmates are still in charge.

Do the rest of the Michiganians deserve what criminals Detroit gives us? Are we the people getting what we deserve from the state's largest concentration of parasites and other Democrats? Not bloody likely. Put up a 30-foot wall and be done with it.

Quote from: quiller on July 24, 2016, 03:33:01 AM
Any serious effort to curb crime in Michigan begins with changing the state constitution to now permit executions, followed by rigorous application of same until recidivists are extinct and the wanna-be's are cowed. We're a bit late on that militia part; thanks to the Dems the inmates are still in charge.

Do the rest of the Michiganians deserve what criminals Detroit gives us? Are we the people getting what we deserve from the state's largest concentration of parasites and other Democrats? Not bloody likely. Put up a 300-foot wall around the city and fill it with 120' of water, and be done with it.

FIFY...

Quote from: Solar on July 24, 2016, 06:07:36 AM
FIFY...

No, I must demur. For one thing, that water is needed for traffic along the Detroit River. Although the city does need a good bath, I doubt all its residents can swim and taxpayers cannot afford life vests.

For another, filling the place with water would extinguish arson fires helping clear land for future development (as if the present land rush is not enough between pizza barons and other millionaires seeking to build the next Renaissance City juuuuuuuust in time to bury the last Renaissance City).

I was downtown recently and the whole place is under construction. Give it two years, the new stadium(s) and other attractions will almost make it worth risking a street mugging.

Quote from: quiller on July 24, 2016, 06:16:55 AM
No, I must demur. For one thing, that water is needed for traffic along the Detroit River. Although the city does need a good bath, I doubt all its residents can swim and taxpayers cannot afford life vests.

For another, filling the place with water would extinguish arson fires helping clear land for future development (as if the present land rush is not enough between pizza barons and other millionaires seeking to build the next Renaissance City juuuuuuuust in time to bury the last Renaissance City).

I was downtown recently and the whole place is under construction. Give it two years, the new stadium(s) and other attractions will almost make it worth risking a street mugging.

Well, Flint has a lot of non potable water that could be used, and the idea was, that not all residents could swim.

Quote from: Solar on July 23, 2016, 10:46:53 PM
Firstly, the govt is not allowed to post American soldiers on the homeland, unless we were invaded, so it's safe to say a militia could easily out number Homeland Security if they tried top amass an assault against the American people.

That doesn't seem to be a very realistic idea. It would be enormously expensive to house the entirely of the regular armed forces outside CONUS not to mention to logisticly support them and that's assuming we could find someone who would want to house all those troops now a days.

QuoteThat's a police matter, not something the militia would get involved in usually. As long as they stay in Detroit.

Completely agree