+- MacResource (https://forums.macresource.com)
+-- Forum: My Category (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: 'Friendly' Political Ranting (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Thread: So... since “OathKeepers” is obviously a poorly regulated militia... (/showthread.php?tid=252240)
So... since “OathKeepers” is obviously a poorly regulated militia... - cbelt3 - 01-27-2021
Should they still be allowed to bear arms ?
I’d personally like to release the angry bears on them.
Re: So... since “OathKeepers” is obviously a poorly regulated militia... - bfd - 01-27-2021
The meaning of the 2nd Amendment has been stretched so far that it really "bears almost no resemblance" to the writers' original intent.
Re: So... since “OathKeepers” is obviously a poorly regulated militia... - rjmacs - 01-27-2021
Militias other than the national guard are illegal nationwide, so no - they shouldn't be allowed to exist as a militia at all.
Re: So... since “OathKeepers” is obviously a poorly regulated militia... - hal - 01-28-2021
rjmacs wrote:
Militias other than the national guard are illegal nationwide, so no - they shouldn't be allowed to exist as a militia at all.
is that true? But, of course, it's perfectly ok for a bunch of guys/gals to get together, shoot a bunch of guns, train for violent encounters and talk about the day when the gov't comes for their guns etc...
Re: So... since “OathKeepers” is obviously a poorly regulated militia... - rjmacs - 01-29-2021
hal wrote:
[quote=rjmacs]
Militias other than the national guard are illegal nationwide, so no - they shouldn't be allowed to exist as a militia at all.
is that true? But, of course, it's perfectly ok for a bunch of guys/gals to get together, shoot a bunch of guns, train for violent encounters and talk about the day when the gov't comes for their guns etc...
Yes, it's true.