um.... I think he was using that to say the guard still counts as a militia... y'know, unless they don'tBigBallinStalin wrote:Thanks for the summary. Not sure what tzor's main point has changed to though.
Moderator: Community Team
um.... I think he was using that to say the guard still counts as a militia... y'know, unless they don'tBigBallinStalin wrote:Thanks for the summary. Not sure what tzor's main point has changed to though.
John Adams wrote:I have come to the conclusion that one useless man is called a disgrace, that two are called a law firm, and that three or more become a Congress! And by God I have had this Congress!
lol if so, then so what? We'll just have to let tzor unfurl his argument and then refold it.fadedpsychosis wrote:um.... I think he was using that to say the guard still counts as a militia... y'know, unless they don'tBigBallinStalin wrote:Thanks for the summary. Not sure what tzor's main point has changed to though.
Why do I need to unfurl my argument? I'm not drunk enough to unfurl an argument; especially my own.BigBallinStalin wrote:lol if so, then so what? We'll just have to let tzor unfurl his argument and then refold it.

We'll just have to agree to disagree.tzor wrote:Why do I need to unfurl my argument? I'm not drunk enough to unfurl an argument; especially my own.BigBallinStalin wrote:lol if so, then so what? We'll just have to let tzor unfurl his argument and then refold it.
I've only been pointing out that at the time of the constitution, the notion of militias was something done by the states, and according to the constitution when called into the service of the federal government was then placed under the President as "Commander in Chief." The right to bear arms in the Constitution was a provision to allow state authority to maintain militias.

We do that often, I'm told.BigBallinStalin wrote:We'll just have to agree to disagree.

