doublegunshop.com - home Forums Militia Enroute to Bunkerville

Very good point Jim, but of course we have seen enough over the years to know they aren't really trying to solve the problem. It's simply one more method for gaining power over others.

I believe my rights in the US have to be established and defended by the US. A quick look at world news and foreign relations would show the value of theory. That has little to do with knowing that rights seem to be under constant attack from within.

I don't think the rancher story has ended or is it a good example of higher rights superseding the state. It was clearly a pr calculation. Wondered before, if 'ranching' fees are paid, will anyone be able to ranch that land.

Reid is still being evasive as to any connection with him his son.

http://www.breitbart.com/InstaBlog/2014/04/14/Harry-Reid-on-Bundy-Ranch-Showdown-It-s-not-Over

Reid was confronted earlier at UNR during the Q & A time after Reid's speech about the cattle issue by Kim Kollman a former teacher at Truckee Meadows Community College, The Reno Gazette Journal reported:

Citing Reuters News Service, the Drudge Report and another website, Kollman asked Reid if he was in collusion with his son and the "Communist Chinese" to forcibly remove Bundy from his property to help bring more solar energy to Southern Nevada. Kollman said Reid was "papering over" the question of possible collusion.

Reid replied, "That is an easy question to paper over. Do you know what you just said? Please read something else. And that is how I'm going to respond to that question."

The crowd applauded Reid. Kollman then asked Reid, "What are you afraid of, sir?" before Kollman was asked by an organizer to sit down, which he did.

I am curious just how Harry Reid can reconcile his statement;

"Well, it's not over. We can't have an American people that violate the law and then just walk away from it. So it's not over," Reid said.

with the Democrat Party's stance on treatment of 12 million illegal aliens, who genius Joe Biden seems to think are already American citizens.

Jim,I didn't ignore anything. I asked earlier if other militias joined the protest, and with no answer I asked for a definition of a militia after your post militia in the singular because it appeared to differ from ours---citizen soldiers, reserves.

Now, you have informed me it's a group of people getting together "as a militia." A common definition for militia, according to OED is "a military force, a civilian army," which is closer to my understanding of the word. A group of people getting together could be anything, eh?

Praying is not anathema to me, Jim. Remember Jesus's injunction to judge not? I pray every day.

Just look at their patriarch of immigration reform :

James, you validate exactly what I am saying. The Constitution does not mean what we think it says... it means what the Courts think it says. The U.S. Supreme Court has the final say when a Constitutional issue advances that far.

Unfortunately, the Second Amendment is not the only amendment which has been misinterpreted, and infringed upon. Most of the infringements and outright violations we see today have sprung from the Progressive Movement. Here at Bunkerville, Nevada, for example, the Governmennt put strict limits on free speech by attempts to limit the number of protesters, and limits on exactly where they could speak. You will not find an amendment in our Constitution that says there must be a separation of church and state... only that the Government cannot inflict a religion on the people. That idea came from a Supreme Court Justice, Learned Hand as I recall, in his written opinion of a Supreme Court case where he stated that "there ought to be a separation of church and state". It is repeated as if it was written by James Mason himself and discussed and debated in the Federalist papers!

This is why it is so important to elect presidents who are likely to nominate Justices who will faithfully interpret the Constitution in the manner that the Founders intended. Their intent when they wrote the Second Amendment was abundantly clear, and that was recently affirmed in the Heller and McDonald cases. Still, the Liberal Democrat lawmakers are trying to do end runs around these decisions. They should be put in prison for contempt of court. The tallies were 5-4 with the Liberal Justices against us. It was that close, yet King repeatedly tells us that the Second is in no danger. And yes, there have been Justices who obviously lied during their confirmation hearings and later did the opposite of what the president who nominated them expected. But Kagan and Sotomayor will be a thorn in our sides for decades.

Yes, we all have to be concerned because the attacks are relentless. We need to first understand that it is folks like King who are at the grassroots of trying to subvert what the Founders intended. They will lie and LULL and pretend that they are on our side.

They are not on our side. We will never convince them to come over to our side. It is what it is, and we need to be intelligent enough to recognize it, or else the erosion will continue.

King, are you an Athiest or not? Make up your mind. Are you praying to the Miqmak Sun god or the Moon or what? Here's a prayer... let's all bow our heads and pray that King will stop being dillusional.

Geez!

So ok you want to nitpick:

Here's 3 common definitions of militia:

1. An army composed of ordinary citizens rather than professional soldiers.

2. A military force that is not part of a regular army and is subject to call for service in an emergency.

3. The whole body of physically fit civilians eligible by law for military service.

Pick whichever one you like.

Keith, we must be agreeing on all but terminology because as I read your latest post, I'm saying "yup, yup, yup" as I read through.

My point is that because the Supremes are people, and because those individuals change over time, and because they are appointed by different Presidents of differing political persuasions, their interpretations must change over time. That is the way of humans.

I'm not saying I like it, or that I want it, or that it's good. Just that it's what happens. And so, given that, I consider the document to be "living".....subject to interpretation over time.

I completely agree that the current aims of the liberal Left include dismantling the individualism and self reliance that has been a hallmark of successful America. And that you are right to struggle against that. And that it is a devious foe that operates in the long term.

The Left wraps itself in a blanket of altruism yet the facts belie that selflessness. It is the Left that is selfish, that is concerned with power for power's sake. It is the Left that is the greatest threat to freedom in the US and around the world. I have never thought otherwise.