Distilled

[Distilled @Distilled193934]

@JillPhys1905 @ChuckPfarrer And I’m an atheist too.

[Distilled @Distilled193934]

@JillPhys1905 @ChuckPfarrer Having been a commander, the chaplain is critical for well being, whether someone is an atheist or not. They are sometimes the only person members will speak with. It might be cultural baggage and historical vestment, but still important.

[Distilled @Distilled193934]

@jbarro Huh.

Maybe define “best?”

[Distilled @Distilled193934]

@RKBAinCA @TheArmedSquid @nicksortor Actually I think Presser made it clear the States, not the Fed govt, could infringe (their words). It was affirmed in 1982 by Quilici.

My point was that saying there can never be any restrictions, reservations or requirements for gun ownership is, as you say, a fantasy.

[Distilled @Distilled193934]

@LesleyAnnRain @Not_the_Bee They ran out of priests and kids?

[Distilled @Distilled193934]

@TheArmedSquid @nicksortor Consider State v Buzzard or Presser v Illinois which specifically tied arms to militias, not individual freedom.

[Distilled @Distilled193934]

@TheArmedSquid @nicksortor I think you’re wrong, but you’ve been a gentleman in the interaction.

[Distilled @Distilled193934]

@christopherrufo @L0m3z But no enemies to the right, right Chris? You’ve created a monster you can’t control. It’s Trump populism.

[Distilled @Distilled193934]

@RKBAinCA @TheArmedSquid @nicksortor State v Buzzard & Presser v Illinois specifically permitted states to restrict firearms, including to militias only.

The definition of a well-regulated militia would be well-drilled, properly functioning, & disciplined. It’s one sentence, I think to be taken as a whole.

[Distilled @Distilled193934]

@ArmandDoma @CathyYoung63 The party needs to get not back her. At all.

[Distilled @Distilled193934]

@TheArmedSquid @nicksortor That said, the framers were not united behind either view. I would say the 2A in the bill of rights should be read primarily in the context of a militia, and regulation of weapon types and registration requirements are reasonable.

[Distilled @Distilled193934]

@TheArmedSquid @nicksortor I think it’s clear that the mechanism of a militia was the vehicle by which the right to keep and bear arms was originally intended. If the intent wasn’t to guarantee a militia as the mechanism it could have been omitted.

[Distilled @Distilled193934]

@TheArmedSquid @nicksortor The primary split was between populated cities and rural areas, not North vs South. Either way, the 2A doesn’t separate the regulation of a militia from people. That’s a more recent novel invention.

[Distilled @Distilled193934]

@TheArmedSquid @nicksortor I disagree as to it being debunked, and I think it belongs in context of a militia. But I’m also a gun owner who supports registration, training and proficiency requirements.

[Distilled @Distilled193934]

@TheArmedSquid @nicksortor Southern states were terrified of a slave uprising.

[Distilled @Distilled193934]

@TheArmedSquid @nicksortor USSC jurisprudence made it apply to individuals, so here we are. Different contemporary copies of the US Constitution had commas in different locations but the meaning wasn’t substantively changed.

[Distilled @Distilled193934]

@TheArmedSquid @nicksortor I think you and I would disagree as to the meaning of the word, in both 1789 as well as now, of “regulated.”

The fact it is all in one sentence shows it was in the terms of a militia. And various localities regulated when and where arms could be carried historically.