Debate Magazine

Billy Johnson [finally] Says Something Intelligent.

Posted on the 23 July 2014 by Mikeb302000
I guess if I were to label someone a pseudo-intellectual, it would have to be the NRA's Billy Johnson since he can appear to think and say some interesting things, but (APU) they don't stand up to scrutiny.
In this case he accidentally made my case for me. That means he really doesn't think through what he says--he just likes the sound of his voice and thinks he looks hip.
Seriously,  if goofball wants to follow what the founding fathers believed in, then he should require military training in schools. 
After all, the Second Amendment does start out "a well-regulated militia being necessary for the security of the free state".
But, the "pro-gun" side wants to forget that part and say it's irrelevant, but that means the Second Amendment is garbage.
After all, why start the sentence with something that is unrelated to the rest of the sentence?
That is called a nonsequitur.  You are saying the Founding Fathers wrote gibberish.
The Second Amendment was implemented by the Militia Acts of 1792, not the Guns for Irresponsible Dickheads Acts of 1792.

In fact, did hard enough and do some serious research and you will find the part about the "well-regulated militia" (which means under civilian control--not an armed mob) is integral to the Second Amendment.

And yet, though this truth would seem so clear, and the importance of a well regulated militia would seem so undeniable, it cannot be disguised, that among the American people there is a growing indifference to any system of militia discipline, and a strong disposition, from a sense of its burthens, to be rid of all regulations. How it is practicable to keep the people duly armed without some organization, it is difficult to see. There is certainly no small danger, that indifference may lead to disgust, and disgust to contempt; and thus gradually undermine all the protection intended by this clause of our national bill of rights.--Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution 3:§§ 1890
I've noticed the hemming and hawing whenever anyone mentions that the Second Amendment right is tied to the responsibility of actually serving in an Article I, Section 8, Clause 16 Militia.  Not saying that you are liable for service as a member of the "unorganised militia" since that designation confers no right or duty other than you can be called up for service.
It's the same thing as saying having a draft card makes you a member of the US military.
Anyway, I can guarantee that once it becomes obligatory and the duties are reimposed that we will see a repeat of what Justice Story mentions above.
So, I say bring it--make people perform the requisite duties under the Second Amendment.
And that means military training in addition to marksmanship.
Then, let's see how many people will be screaming for their Second Amendment rights.
BTW, I support your Second Amendment right--please go to your nearest National Guard recruiting office to exercise it.
As I said, that's not what you want to hear, but what you should be hearing.

See also:

Back to Featured Articles on Logo Paperblog