Quote:
Originally Posted by zimmy
So then, how is the militia aspect relevant if the constitution doesn't protect the right of citizens to have weapons of defense that the government has? At the time of writing, the citizens had the same weapons available to the central gov. So the militia is relevant to why someone should have an Ar-15, yet if the feds want to come after them, they are going todo it with f-22's and other tools of war
Founders couldn't have predicted where we would be today, maybe?
|
What's even funnier is his assertion that you're not entitled to nukes or tanks because you can't "bear" them because they're too heavy
Back in the day a state militiaman was supposed to have a rifle, bayonet and rucksack...not much else.
Threaded Mode