What a steaming piece of shit
this post was submitted on 22 Nov 2023
45 points (85.7% liked)
politics
19103 readers
3823 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Reads like another sensational bullshit anti 2A hit piece.
What does this have to do with well-regulated militias?
Well regulated meant well supplied, trained and fully manned in the late 1700 when the constitution was written. I’d love to see local armories in every city with with ranges fully stocked with state supplied ammunition and firearms that are available to the public! Having a large healthy industrial base that can support this kind of roll out is key.
https://constitutioncenter.org/images/uploads/news/CNN_Aug_11.pdf
Hell yeah. I’ve often thought of starting a collective for gun ownership that would give people a safe place to store and practice with their fire arms.
Johnson's Dictionary, which was the most prominent English language dictionary at the time of the drafting of the Constitution, defines "regulate" as follows:
To RE'GULATE. v.a. [regula, Lat.]
-
To adjust by rule or method.
-
To direct.
Which, in turn, derives from the Latin regulo by way of the past participle regulatus, which significantly predates English and also means to direct or rule. Don't know where this nonsense about not meaning that at the time comes from, "regulated" has meant "subject to rule or direction" as long as it's been a word in English.
I would certainly love to see more well-regulated militias, the National Guard serves that purpose. I'm all for local facilities to stockpile arms and provide training for those well-regulated militias.
The same people who want to use the 1700s definition of 'well regulated' will scream if you use the 1700s definition of a firearm.
Yes that is certainly is the modern definition of regulate. But not at all how it was used when the founders wrote the constitution.
I’ll just place the same link here in case you didn’t read it last time.
https://constitutioncenter.org/images/uploads/news/CNN_Aug_11.pdf
I did in fact read it last time, however your response indicates that you did not read mine, so please take this opportunity to reread my comment. There is a link there that you clearly did not read last time, so please take this opportunity to do so.
Since it seems likely that you will not, I will simplify for your benefit:
Johnson's Dictionary was the main English dictionary when the founders wrote the Constitution.
Dictionaries list the accepted definitions of words at the time those dictionaries were written.
Johnson's Dictionary defines regulate as I have (which makes obvious sense since I copied and pasted my definition from it).
Therefore, the definition I provided was the accepted definition at the time the founders wrote the Constitution (also for thousands of years beforehand since it derives from a minimally altered Latin root).
Q.E.D.
My comment was not about the modern definition, but about how the word was defined in the mid 18th century (which you would know if you looked at the link I provided).
I understand that there is a great deal of gun lobby propaganda which has tried to revise history and pretend that (certain) words had drastically different definitions in the past in order to maximize their market. I understand that propaganda can look very convincing, especially when a great deal of money comes into the equation and even politicians and judges are compromised.
Please use your brain to evaluate claims, even when they're disseminated by CNN.
Lol you're a moron if you think that website was around in the revolutionary days
...um. You do realize that website is a digitization of a physical dictionary which was in fact around in the revolutionary days? If you clicked the link you would be taken to a page which includes a picture of the entry out of the physical book which was in print in revolutionary days.
What does your ignorance have to do with reality?
The same as everyone else's. Which, based on the dialogue, is quite prestigious.
He's a hero