Rather: You Need License, Training to Drive — You Should Need Same for Guns

Breitbart ^ | 03/24/2021 | Pam Key

[walkingdead]

True the militia is of course made up of residents of the state. But it is called up and controlled by the government. Thus the check and balance of the whole population being armed to make sure that militia is not used for nefarious purposes.

If I get time I will try to find an excellent article by a grammar/sentence structure expert. Gets into the sentence structure which lays out the meaning. What do they say, sentence structure matters (SSM like BLM haha)

[Campion]

There is no Constitutional right to drive a motor vehicle.

There is also no law prohibiting you from driving all day long with no license and no training, as long as it's on your own property. It's only driving on public roads that requires a license.

(I seem to recall that some midwestern states even had or perhaps still have laws allowing unlicensed teenagers too young to drive to drive on public roads, as long as they were driving from one of their family's fields to another.)

[SkyDancer]

Or training to be a responsible reporter.

[SkyDancer]

Or training to be a responsible reporter.

[walkingdead]

https://constitution.org/1-Constitution/2ll/schol/2amd_grammar.htm

Here is a good analysis showing why the “right of the people to keep and bear arms” is not dependent on the militia at all. Also lays out why, in the sentence structure, the right of the people already exists and is not granted. You have that right at birth.

The militia and the security of the state are mere byproducts of something that already exists.

I believe it is another check and balance although the author does not go into that.

Enjoy!

[Altura Ct.]

How about voter ID AH?

[bgill]

Rather should tell this in person to Chicago street thugs.

[palmer]

That is good, thanks.

[V K Lee]

Hey, Dan me man, why not take that one step
further and say the same regarding ‘the right to vote’
Training, license, a “wating period” from the time of
registration until one enters a voting booth.

Go fly a kite!

[FlingWingFlyer]

Sorry Danny. Most of us learned about GUNS at the same place we learned to drive. From the U.S. Government’s FRIGGIN’ MILITARY. Kiss my ass Skippy. Why don’t you worry about your job of pounding sand up peoples’ asses and we’ll handle the gun stuff, MORON!

[IYAS9YAS]

Not according to the Founding Fathers.

Actually, the training part is correct. The license part is not. Well-regulated back in the day meant well-trained and equipped.

[LibWhacker]

Yep. Lacked common sense, and were downright stupid.

[Red in Blue PA]

Using this “logic”, you should need a permit to vote. Or publish writings.

After all, those can each affect millions of people.

[walkingdead]

You are very welcome. Lays out pretty well what you and I already know.

Best part....the grammar expert is not exactly pro gun, but at least he is intellectually honest.

[Lazamataz]

You know what else you need a license for, Dan?

You need a license for fabricating fake documents disparaging a Republican Presidential candidate just before the election.

[lapsus calami]

 

 

Another criminal windbag opens his piehole.

 

As far as "background checks", one thing no one is stopping to think about, there are thousands of people pouring over the border and disappearing in all directions. Nobody knows who the heck they really are, and they'll be like chameleons, getting and changing IDs as they go. Any alleged "background check" system is rendered ineffective and moot just on that factor alone.

 

And I'm like what a Freeper once posted years ago - anyone uttering the phrase "common sense laws" in regard to constitutional rights should be smacked in the face with an iron skillet.

 

 

[Fresh Wind]

What is needed is a common-sense approach.

Every time you see a leftist use the words "common sense", you can be sure that more of your freedoms will be slipping away soon.

[Campion]

Yeah, the 2A part is specifically addressing the "equipped" part, not the "trained" part. "Well-regulated" meant (among other things) that the militia could be "turned out" with little notice and be already equipped with their own private weapons.

Ironic that the libtards are screeching about "weapons of war" on America's streets. The right to own & bear "weapons of war" is exactly what the 2nd Amendment guarantees.

[IYAS9YAS]

The right to own & bear "weapons of war" is exactly what the 2nd Amendment guarantees.

Ayup.

[LibWhacker]

I interpret that to mean it is desirable for the militia to have some training. Because it's obvious that an untrained and disorganized militia is probably not the best armed force to defend a nation.

However, no individual was ever required to have training in order to purchase and own a gun, or even to belong to the militia.

Why? Because first and foremost we are a free people and that right must be respected over all others and cannot be trampled upon. We are nothing without freedom.