• 181 Posts
Joined 1 year ago
Cake day: June 30th, 2023


  • The entirety of federalist 29 is about the second amendment. I think it’s safe to assume the paragraph I quoted from federalist 29 also is.

    Suuure it is 🙄

    Calling militias “the best possible defense” against a standing federal army seems pretty cut and dry.

    Except that’s not what the amendment itself says. That’s Alexander Hamilton’s opinion, NOT the rationale that was agreed on when drafting the text

    No mind reading necessary, just regular reading.

    And a bit of imagination to make the unconnected pieces fit together to mean what you want them to mean.

    You’re acting no better than the libertarian nutjobs who insist that taxation is theft and also unconstitutional.

  • Yes, this is the exact intention of the second amendment. Armed resistance against tyrannical government

    Nope. Judging by how they used militias at the time, they meant it for defending the federal government against both invasions and rebellions. The “defense against tyranny” reason is just an invention of people trying to justify their guns.

    The founding fathers envisioned state militias that would rival the power of the federal army and keep it in check

    Nope. There WAS no federal army at the time. They used militias IN STEAD OF a standing army, not as a check on an existing one. Which of course invalidates the entire amendment now that the country has the biggest and most advanced military in the history of humanity.

    All of that being said, I consider assassination of a tyrant you can’t rid the people of in any other way the only form of murder that’s acceptable as it serves the common good.

    Putin is one such tyrant, Orban probably is, and Donald Trump DEFINITELY is. The world would have been a much better place if Crooks had been a better shot.