Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

No, the Second Amendment does not say that, Baxter.
1 posted on 06/15/2016 1:18:22 PM PDT by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-83 last
To: Olog-hai

Screw you BOR! You POS.


128 posted on 06/15/2016 6:31:04 PM PDT by stevio (God,Guns,Guts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Olog-hai

Somebody please tell the idiot Bill O’Reilly that the states added the second amendment in order to accept and ratify the constitution as a means to regulate the Federal Militia( Standing Army)and not the common man. The means to regulate a standing Federal Armed force was to have all men armed without infringement. The 2nd amendment is for all men being able to keep and bare the same equipment as the standing army. The nation would always outnumber a stranding army so no tyrant could abuse government power. That is the true meaning. That is why the Miller supreme court case said that short barreled shotguns are not protected under the 2nd amendment in its language because they said the standing army did not sue them. This directly implied by SCOTUS that the people can always bare the standard arms that soldiers have and use. Get with the program Bill and the truth.


129 posted on 06/15/2016 6:39:59 PM PDT by Mat_Helm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Olog-hai

Wrong as 2 boys humping Oreally.


131 posted on 06/15/2016 10:46:31 PM PDT by vpintheak (Freedom is not equality; and equality is not freedom!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-83 last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson