Why would the Founders Regulate a TOOL ?

[Lowlight]

I have been on twitter more than FB,

I am over FB, I want to close it, but use it to advertise... one of these days I will figure out how to log out, and then use something like Hootsuite to load it from afar... but I don't want to be "logged in anymore"

Twitter has been more fun, but definitely militant and full of BlueAnon

Its just easier to strike with less characters

 

[Choid]

One of my dogs has a facebook account. Not choid, she stays off that shit. Twitter just makes me angry. The people are so aggressively stupid it makes me want to scream. It's like the same 25 morons going back and forth.

 

[quietmike]

Arms is an inclusive term, meaning any weapon.

Even SCOTUS agreed on this point in Caetano vs Massachusetts.

 

[TurboTrout]

Our rights were granted by scotus?

 

[sirhrmechanic]

When the founders wrote the Bill of Rights, they had just finished an eight year total war against the most powerful and arguably tyrannical empire in history to that time... they were not coming back from duck season.

The idea that they were protecting fowling pieces is ludicrous. They were ensuring an armed citizenry capable of defending their republic from all enemies, foreign and domestic.

They knew that the Second Amendment secures all the others... lest they become simply pieces of parchment.

And that defense of ones liberties is the most basic of natural born rights.

Sirhr

 

[candyx]

To coin an old saying..."Gun Control......means using both hands!" Mac

 

[Choid]

Our rights were granted by scotus?

To be more exact about it, the founders found in the first lines of Locke's second a convenient fiction to describe man before society, and his entrance into society. In reality, they probably were savvy enough to realize that man and society arose together, so the concept of these great God given rights of which man compromises some of them was probably as ridiculous to them as it is to us. That said, they wanted to explain, I believe, that certain fundamental rights were so necessary for a free society that they needed to be treated as an inalienable bedrock. That is the genesis of our protected rights, and not a lovely story about God granting them and nobody being able to take them away. Of course they realized those rights could be taken from us. That is why they protected them.

 

[candyx]

To coin an old saying..."Gun Control......means using both hands!" Mac

I can't use both hands I would drop my rifle and after the first hand is on it the second hand really wouldn't have anything to hold onto.

 

[TurboTrout]

To be more exact about it, the founders found in the first lines of Locke's second a convenient fiction to describe man before society, and his entrance into society. In reality, they probably were savvy enough to realize that man and society arose together, so the concept of these great God given rights of which man compromises some of them was probably as ridiculous to them as it is to us. That said, they wanted to explain, I believe, that certain fundamental rights were so necessary for a free society that they needed to be treated as an inalienable bedrock. That is the genesis of our protected rights, and not a lovely story about God granting them and nobody being able to take them away. Of course they realized those rights could be taken from us. That is why they protected them.

 

[theLBC]

 

[10ring'r]

I can't use both hands I would drop my rifle and after the first hand is on it the second hand really wouldn't have anything to hold onto.

Ummmm, we are talking about "guns", correct?? OR, are you playing with your imagination again??
Mac

 

[anon]

"In all the colonies, as in England, the militia system was based on the principle of the assize of arms. This implied the general obligation of all adult male inhabitants to possess arms, and, with certain exceptions, to cooperate in the work of defence." "The possession of arms also implied the possession of ammunition, and the authorities paid quite as much attention to the latter as to the former." "A year later [1632] it was ordered that any single man who had not furnished himself with arms might be put out to service, and this became a permanent part of the legislation of the colony [Massachusetts]."

Quotes are lifted from US v. Miller 1939

US v. Miller

For the poors ...

"If any private shall make it appear to the satisfaction of the court hereafter to be appointed for trying delinquencies under this act that he is so poor that he cannot purchase the arms herein required, such court shall cause them to be purchased out of the money arising from delinquents."

 

[camotoe]

The constitution was written with weak language on purpose.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00NRJEAN4?pf_rd_r=X0Y9SX0EK992M3B35PTJ&pf_rd_p=89879054-2e37-4233-9fd7-bd5a93dd076a&pd_rd_r=b1707ecf-5d3a-4fc2-95ad-f4b02d3b2dee&pd_rd_w=OiUCi&pd_rd_wg=fh31v

 

[GTOJOSH]

The man, often referred to as the father of the Constitution cleared it up in his wording:
“The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country.”
– James Madison, I Annals of Congress 434, June 8, 1789

Or
“A militia when properly formed are in fact the people themselves…and include, according to the past and general usuage of the states, all men capable of bearing arms… “To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them.”
– Richard Henry Lee, Federal Farmer No. 18, January 25, 1788

And Finally, My Favorite Individual in history,
“It may be laid down, as a primary position, and the basis of our system, that every citizen who enjoys the protection of a free government, owes not only a proportion of his property, but even of his personal services to the defence of it, and consequently that the Citizens of America (with a few legal and official exceptions) from 18 to 50 Years of Age should be borne on the Militia Rolls, provided with uniform Arms, and so far accustomed to the use of them, that the Total strength of the Country might be called forth at Short Notice on any very interesting Emergency.”
-George Washington, letter to Alexander Hamilton May 2, 1783
My only question? Can i choose a surplus m60 provided by the government instead of a stimulus check? What say you George?

 

[sirhrmechanic]

... y only question? Can i choose a surplus m60 provided by the government instead of a stimulus check? What say you George?

You mean like this??

Go big or go home, I guess!

Sirhr

 

[BuildingConceptsllc]

The only caution I have on this thought is that who meets and drills? The national guard that’s who. This plays into their argument that the NG is the militia and not the people. Who would the militia meet and drill with if the constitution did not establish and maintain N army but rather only a Navy? To me, well regulated in the kings English, is prepared, ready and proficient.

Yes, Well regulated meant "well supplied and able" in the most direct "translation " into today's English. It's ridiculously clear what the founders intentionally did for anyone with half a brain. It's just as ridiculously clear that the grabbers are not interested in any truth telling what so ever! This is why ANY "discussion " or "common sense" anything with them is simply the rest of us conceding our Rights, by another name.

 

[MK20]

I am not putting any weight on it,

I am simply stating the meaning, and the reference text around it shows that Well Regulated was more about being Well Lead, vs being Regulated by the definitions of today

I am not deep diving into that part of the clause at all, other than to say, every male was part of the militia and well regulated has nothing to do with regulations but leadership

It wasn't even just about leadership. In that day, well regulated referred to being outfitted and able to operate in a professional manner, i.e., like the Regular army. Well regulated was a common term back then that meant, "Able to act and be equipped like a professional army."

 

[Longshot231]

Also, to remind everyone: 2020 was the highest year for gun sales that introduced several MILLION new gun OWNERS to the fold.

~400 million firearms in circulation in this country. They aren't going to be able to take any of that away. Down the line they could make it harder to acquire a gun but with this being the current Administration I don't see it happening unless politicians themselves become victims.

"White House Causes Frustration In Private And Public Responses To Gun Violence"

One facet of the gun control argument that is lost on the Marxist gun-grabbers is that those guns sold in 2020 are the ones that were done with the NICS check accomplished as part of the transfer process. In other words, the buyers of those firearms passed a background check.

They passed the background check that the gun-grabbers had wanted for years. We've always heard the blather from the gun grabbers that "all we want is for a buyer to pass a government background check so that the gun doesn't fall into the wrong hands."

They got what they wanted and now they aren't happy about it. They get a wedgie in their panties with the thought of anyone owning a gun. That even means the people who have passed the background check.

So when a gun grabber is lamenting the fact that millions of guns were sold in 2020, tell them that is correct but those buyers also passed the very stupid background check that they have been clamoring for. Then ask them if their back hurts every time they move the goal post.

 

[pmclaine]

Even their discussion of regulating the militia didn’t mean the creation of the national guard.

They meant specifically a well led/drilled/equipped/trained militia of commoners led by commoners separate from the government.

Their purpose was multi-fold - one was that they had just seen the failure of a leading military to project power over the oceans against a peasant militia. Secondly, standing armies had always been a key tool used in the death of freedom, and were considered undesirable.

They were right on both counts.

Our need to fight the Civil War/World Wars/Cold War bent and twisted our country into quite a mess.

Every good sized town in the Northeast has old "Armories" that now sit rotting or have been turned into condos or the senior center.

In their day Im sure they were stocked with equipment and they had members that met and drilled, probably a mess, but it provided some form of familiarity with the military. They used to promote marksmanship and it was a place to socialize and discuss events of the day in person. They were also probably The Bear Pit in person.

These "local militia" were the units that filled the ranks of the early Federal Army in the Civil war. Most were "private companies" either lead by the town rich guy or otherwise politically connected.

Imagine if that came back?

We have a huge majority absolutely clueless and not caring about military matters or arms since the reduction of local militia/guard/reserve and the end of the two year draft. It allows 99% to live in Unicorn Land while 1% voluntarily bear the burden.

The result is another area where citizens have no skin in the game.

A little off topic and I fear mentioning it would fool people into giving the word "militia" a collective right interpretation rather than an individual right as all the initial rights in the BOR are. I cant understand anyone making the argument all Amendments 1-9 except the Second were individual rights, that makes no sense.

Every time this comes up I recommend this book...

The Second Amendment Primer: A Citizen's... book by Les Adams

www.thriftbooks.com

Its a great source for the historical genesis and theory the Founders used when developing the Second. It eliminates the "They never intended..." weapons of war crap.

Remember....when the issue arm of the day was a smooth bore musket, many in the colonies were armed with much more capable rifled barrels. Cannon were private purchase items bought by the "town rich guy".

If the owner of this house....

Didnt have cannon buried in his farm field.....

This....

and this.....

Would not matter........

 

[Mike Ryan]

Proof the the 2nd A protect "military" arms:

When the 2nd A was written, firearms were mostly muskets. Since the 2nd A protected muskets, and the military used muskets, the 2nd protects military weapons in the hands of privates citizens

It's actually much simpler than that. The Framers said "right to bear ARMS." Not muskets, not swords, but Arms. The framers were smart. They knew "arms" had evolved over the centuries and would likely continue to evolve. By leaving the definition broadly as Arms, it was clearly their intention that the people have access to keep and bear the same Arms as the militia in order to be a check on a tyrannical government that may use the militia against the people. Every single "common sense" gun law that restricts what weapon systems we have access to is a direct violation of the 2nd amendment. Period.

 

[Longshot231]

It's actually much simpler than that. The Framers said "right to bear ARMS." Not muskets, not swords, but Arms. The framers were smart. They knew "arms" had evolved over the centuries and would likely continue to evolve. By leaving the definition broadly as Arms, it was clearly their intention that the people have access to keep and bear the same Arms as the militia in order to be a check on a tyrannical government that may use the militia against the people. Every single "common sense" gun law that restricts what weapon systems we have access to is a direct violation of the 2nd amendment. Period.

From a letter written to Abigail Adams by John Adams on June 17, 1775.

"I can now inform you that the Congress have made Choice of the modest and virtuous, the amiable, generous and brave George Washington Esqr., to be the General of the American Army, and that he is to repair as soon as possible to the Camp before Boston. This Appointment will have a great Effect, in cementing and securing the Union of these Colonies. -- The Continent is really in earnest in defending the Country. They have voted Ten Companies of Rifle Men to be sent from Pensylvania, Maryland and Virginia, to join the Army before Boston. These are an excellent Species of Light Infantry. They use a peculiar Kind of [ . . . ] [ call'd] a Rifle -- it has circular or [ . . . ] Grooves within the Barrell, and carries a Ball, with great Exactness to great Distances. They are the most accurate Marksmen in the World."

That was the "sniper rifle" or the "precision rifle" of the day.

 

[Kinetic Moose]

I think what is missing is civics classes where it was explained what a right was and that we had a duty to excercise it frequently to remind everyone government included that we had it. Now that no one is excercising rights the basic premise has fallen to the wayside. Guns are just the last straw before dictatorship as we all know and have seen around the world. I don’t know how common knowledge it is but in decades past it was a requirement to learn to use and shoot a rifle in grade school. That’s excercising a right, and the NRA actually opposed it!
we have lost so much by not tending to the younger generations it maybe impossible to retrieve at this point.
simple things like being able to discuss contrary points of Veiw without emotion or hostility are gone in schools today where that was the entire point of school in years past to expose people to the world, now it’s simply indoctrination.
They won’t wake up until they ban steak knives with pointy ends like the Brit doctors tried to do. They have been placed under the illusion that fairness exists in both society and nature.

 

[Gustav7]

Arms is an inclusive term, meaning any weapon.

Even SCOTUS agreed on this point in Caetano vs Massachusetts.

According to many older dictionaries, it means "any implement used in an offensive or defensive manner". This should be used to sue NYC for their body armor ban. We should be using the 2nd amendment argument for any weapon or device that can be used in an offensive or defensive manner.... Clubs, bats, switchblades, all firearms, etc...

My 1957 copyright New Century Dictionary printed and edited in New York, USA.
The definition for arms reads: "an offensive or defensive implement and/or weapon".
To arm someone or something is defined as: "to equip with arms; furnish with weapons, armor, or any means of offense or defense".

 

[pmclaine]

It's actually much simpler than that. The Framers said "right to bear ARMS." Not muskets, not swords, but Arms. The framers were smart. They knew "arms" had evolved over the centuries and would likely continue to evolve. By leaving the definition broadly as Arms, it was clearly their intention that the people have access to keep and bear the same Arms as the militia in order to be a check on a tyrannical government that may use the militia against the people. Every single "common sense" gun law that restricts what weapon systems we have access to is a direct violation of the 2nd amendment. Period.

During the Miller trial the Supreme Court came up with the term "in common use" and they based that on the equipage of your current infantry squad, not your local hunter.

They realized the Second amendment was intended for resisting the troops of tyrannical govt.

This is why history has to be erased by enemies of the Constitution.

Miller would have won his case had his lawyer said "Gentlemen of the court I introduce to you the standard Infantry Trench shotgun, My client is innocent as less than 18 inch barrels are endemic to the Infantry squad." but Miller died and the case was dismissed.

 

[pmclaine]

I think what is missing is civics classes where it was explained what a right was and that we had a duty to excercise it frequently to remind everyone government included that we had it. Now that no one is excercising rights the basic premise has fallen to the wayside. Guns are just the last straw before dictatorship as we all know and have seen around the world. I don’t know how common knowledge it is but in decades past it was a requirement to learn to use and shoot a rifle in grade school. That’s excercising a right, and the NRA actually opposed it!
we have lost so much by not tending to the younger generations it maybe impossible to retrieve at this point.
simple things like being able to discuss contrary points of Veiw without emotion or hostility are gone in schools today where that was the entire point of school in years past to expose people to the world, now it’s simply indoctrination.
They won’t wake up until they ban steak knives with pointy ends like the Brit doctors tried to do. They have been placed under the illusion that fairness exists in both society and nature.

Weird that in an age of "Fortnite", kids having a ton of "lingo" knowledge regarding firearms....my kid would rather "Fortnite" an AR than fire the real thing......

Masturbation is going to be chronic in the New World.

 

[DarnYankeeUSMC]

Lawyers argued this and lawyers argued that and lawyers decided to interpret it this way and lawyers added this.
Are you seeing the recurring problem?

 

[Choid]

Lawyers argued this and lawyers argued that and lawyers decided to interpret it this way and lawyers added this.
Are you seeing the recurring problem?

35/55 of the delegates to the constitutional convention were lawyers, so I am pretty sure that lawyers arguing about laws and rights was not something the founding fathers were against.

 

[BufordTJustice]

"shall not be infringed..." Sadly this has not been the case.

 

[BufordTJustice]

Citizens are slowly becoming subjects to the evil will of the crown.

 

[Longshot231]

Weird that in an age of "Fortnite", kids having a ton of "lingo" knowledge regarding firearms....my kid would rather "Fortnite" an AR than fire the real thing......

Masturbation is going to be chronic in the New World.

Tell me if I am wrong on this. Ask a kid if they would play "Fortnite" but they were not allowed to have any weapons in the game? Again, no weapons of any kind except for just a few "chosen" players.

Heck, that could apply to any shoot-em-up video games. Just ask them if they would play a game where only some players get the weapons and they have none.

Their answer would probably be NO. Then ask them would they like to go through real life without any weapons. Would they like to face a real badass with only their fists? Would they like to guard their home instead of some video game cache with just their fists instead of a weapon?

If the kid has any intelligence then their answer, again, would be NO. Then tell them that they are beginning to understand the reason for the 2nd Amendment.

 

[Doc68]

The left uses countries such as the UK and Australia when arguing gun control, why don’t they use the same countries when arguing about immigration laws.....because those countries are far stricter than here.


Doc

 

[Longshot231]

The left uses countries such as the UK and Australia when arguing gun control, why don’t they use the same countries when arguing about immigration laws.....because those countries are far stricter than here.


Doc

There you go again. You're using facts to fight feelings.

 

[Snipe260]

Militia is any male, 16 to 60

no women

What about trans genders?

 

[pmclaine]

Tell me if I am wrong on this. Ask a kid if they would play "Fortnite" but they were not allowed to have any weapons in the game? Again, no weapons of any kind except for just a few "chosen" players.

Heck, that could apply to any shoot-em-up video games. Just ask them if they would play a game where only some players get the weapons and they have none.

Their answer would probably be NO. Then ask them would they like to go through real life without any weapons. Would they like to face a real badass with only their fists? Would they like to guard their home instead of some video game cache with just their fists instead of a weapon?

If the kid has any intelligence then their answer, again, would be NO. Then tell them that they are beginning to understand the reason for the 2nd Amendment.

Good logic game.

Few years ago son and friend were in back of car and I asked if their school was saying "The Pledge".

Both said their classes were but his friend said its weird because they have a "chinese" kid in their class.

I thought first is the kid actually "chinese" or an American of asian descent but that didnt matter at the moment.

I did ask if he thought the Chinese should stop their traditions if he was over in China and by some indoctrinated cuck logic he thought that was different.

So other cultures get to celebrate their uniqueness but ours must "submit" to others.

That kids family proudly displays sheeps blood on their door frame in the form of BLM signs.

 

[Longshot231]

Good logic game.

Few years ago son and friend were in back of car and I asked if their school was saying "The Pledge".

Both said their classes were but his friend said its weird because they have a "chinese" kid in their class.

I thought first is the kid actually "chinese" or an American of asian descent but that didnt matter at the moment.

I did ask if he thought the Chinese should stop their traditions if he was over in China and by some indoctrinated cuck logic he thought that was different.

So other cultures get to celebrate their uniqueness but ours must "submit" to others.

That kids family proudly displays sheeps blood on their door frame in the form of BLM signs.

Ask them, if at the end of the game, they racked up a gazillion points, how would they feel if the had some of their points deducted to help out the players they beat? That way, everyone could be a winner - or - loser.

Once they understand the stupidity of doing something like that then they are going to understand what is wrong with socialism.

 

[armorpl8chikn]

Sure it's a tool,

It help build freedom, the opposition understands that too so of course X amount of regulation would be put in place because that particular tool can hurt them.

But consider this.

Every image of citizen back then storming the gates, most carried something including their farming tools

Looks like a shovel in that picture

they went into battle with whatever they had ... pitchforks, scythes, etc,

That is more likely a flat hoe.

 

[pmclaine]

That is more likely a flat hoe.

Are you talking about Kamala?

 

[armorpl8chikn]

Its real simple.

"A well balanced breakfast, being necessary to the nourishment of the human body. The right of the people to prepare and eat breakfast, shall not be infringed."

 

[armorpl8chikn]

Furthermore. People who would argue, that 2A is somehow a collective right, right of the militia, militia is the military, militia is the NG, etc.
OR: Would argue that the founders couldn't forsee types of weapons available today.

All those people are extremely dangerous people.

 

[TurboTrout]

Every good sized town in the Northeast has old "Armories" that now sit rotting or have been turned into condos or the senior center.

In their day Im sure they were stocked with equipment and they had members that met and drilled, probably a mess, but it provided some form of familiarity with the military. They used to promote marksmanship and it was a place to socialize and discuss events of the day in person. They were also probably The Bear Pit in person.

These "local militia" were the units that filled the ranks of the early Federal Army in the Civil war. Most were "private companies" either lead by the town rich guy or otherwise politically connected.

Imagine if that came back?

We have a huge majority absolutely clueless and not caring about military matters or arms since the reduction of local militia/guard/reserve and the end of the two year draft. It allows 99% to live in Unicorn Land while 1% voluntarily bear the burden.

The result is another area where citizens have no skin in the game.

A little off topic and I fear mentioning it would fool people into giving the word "militia" a collective right interpretation rather than an individual right as all the initial rights in the BOR are. I cant understand anyone making the argument all Amendments 1-9 except the Second were individual rights, that makes no sense.

Every time this comes up I recommend this book...

The Second Amendment Primer: A Citizen's... book by Les Adams

www.thriftbooks.com

Its a great source for the historical genesis and theory the Founders used when developing the Second. It eliminates the "They never intended..." weapons of war crap.

Remember....when the issue arm of the day was a smooth bore musket, many in the colonies were armed with much more capable rifled barrels. Cannon were private purchase items bought by the "town rich guy".

If the owner of this house....

Didnt have cannon buried in his farm field.....

This....

and this.....

Would not matter........

It’s odd that the birthplaces of American independence are now the most tyrannical statist shitholes

 

[Doc68]

Furthermore. People who would argue, that 2A is somehow a collective right, right of the militia, militia is the military, militia is the NG, etc.
OR: Would argue that the founders couldn't forsee types of weapons available today.

All those people are extremely dangerous people.

My counter argument to “they couldnt envison today’s weapons”, well then 1st amendment doesn’t apply to TV news, internet or any other modern outlets. Only parchment paper and quill pens.....

Doc

 

[TurboTrout]

My counter argument to “they couldnt envison today’s weapons”, well then 1st amendment doesn’t apply to TV news, internet or any other modern outlets. Only parchment paper and quill pens.....

Doc

The founding fathers were fine with people owning the same weapons the military at the time used.

Musket for a musket

Heck Jefferson even wrote a letter saying private merchants could mount cannons on their ships.

The couldn’t picture modern weapons, well not really, guns haven’t changed that much, long thing that shoots little metal things out, and they had automatics. I’d also say that with modern medicine and modern weapons a fire fight is less scary these days as back in the musket ball and leech/saw days of the past.

Also why do people mix the guard in with the militia? In the event of the gov going tyrannical the NG is going to take its marching orders from that government, NOT from the people. One might say the NG is the governments militia, where as local private militia would be more the people’s militia.

door to door raids in LA



Waco


currently in DC

folks who think the guard would have the people’s or the constitutions back, vs the states back, should things go tyrannical, they need to read a little more history.

 

[pmclaine]

The founding fathers were fine with people owning the same weapons the military at the time used.

Musket for a musket

Heck Jefferson even wrote a letter saying private merchants could mount cannons on their ships.

The couldn’t picture modern weapons, well not really, guns haven’t changed that much, long thing that shoots little metal things out, and they had automatics. I’d also say that with modern medicine and modern weapons a fire fight is less scary these days as back in the musket ball and leech/saw days of the past.

Also why do people mix the guard in with the militia? In the event of the gov going tyrannical the NG is going to take its marching orders from that government, NOT from the people. One might say the NG is the governments militia, where as local private militia would be more the people’s militia.

door to door raids in LA



Waco

folks who think the guard would have the people’s or the constitutions back, vs the states back, should things go tyrannical, they need to read a little more history.

Active militia in Massachusetts.....

http://www.nationallancers.org/

 

[TurboTrout]

Active militia in Massachusetts.....

http://www.nationallancers.org/

“National Lancers was as the governor’s mounted ceremonial escort; the Lancers, as volunteer militia, was also charged with enforcing the law and defending the Commonwealth from invasion and insurrection”

Seems more like a horse club, also replace “insurrection” with “defending the constitution”

More like the governors honor guard than a militia as was intended in our founding documents. Will award them half a point for at least having the stones to openly identify as a militia

Out of all the historic colors for a coat for a militia lol

 

[pmclaine]

“National Lancers was as the governor’s mounted ceremonial escort; the Lancers, as volunteer militia, was also charged with enforcing the law and defending the Commonwealth from invasion and insurrection”

Seems more like a horse club, also replace “insurrection” with “defending the constitution”

Seems more the the governors honor guard than a militia as was intended in our founding documents.

They were an organized militia now a ceremonial unit separate from the Guard/Reserve.

Their main function now is performing re-enactments of the Revere/Dawes/Prescott ride on Patriots Day.

They do get DOD support though and ae required to drill/train/qualify on occasion with service rifle.

Uniforms are big money....kind of a club for horsemen with a cavalry jones.

 

[TurboTrout]

They were an organized militia now a ceremonial unit separate from the Guard/Reserve.

Their main function now is performing re-enactments of the Revere/Dawes/Prescott ride on Patriots Day.

They do get DOD support though and ae required to drill/train/qualify on occasion with service rifle.

Uniforms are big money....kind of a club for horsemen with a cavalry jones.

So it’s a government funded horse club.

That’s about as useful as a pork pie in a synagogue

 

[SilentStalkr]

It’s funny you mention this. I sit down to have lunch. Turn on the TV and boom news says some dude ran a barricade, hit two people, jumped out with a knife and was shot. Who do they blame? The militia.

 

[pmclaine]

So it’s a government funded horse club.

That’s about as useful as a pork pie in a synagogue

Good people. I knew the last commander, WWII Marine, Just passed early January prior to his 99th birthday.

One of his other endeavors was to maintain a good life for the retired "Old Guard" horses from DC. He had a farm in NH that they would do horse stuff in peace until passing away.

 

[TurboTrout]

It’s funny you mention this. I sit down to have lunch. Turn on the TV and boom news says some dude ran a barricade, hit two people, jumped out with a knife and was shot. Who do they blame? The militia.

According to the statists, the national guard is our militia, so the national guard crashed a car into their own barrier and pulled out a knife? Didn’t know the guard issues kbars. Huh

Ether way isn’t that a pretty calm day in DC terms? I mean don’t they have gang killings in democrat cities like that on the top and bottom of the hour?

Meh

 

[gimpy]