Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Rhiannon12866

(205,544 posts)
Wed Jun 1, 2022, 09:38 PM Jun 2022

Former Marksmanship Instructor Exposes 2nd Amendment Lies - MeidasTouch



Former Marine Marksmanship instructor and Arizona Democratic candidate for Secretary of State Adrian Fontes exposes the truth behind the Second Amendment, the real meaning of a militia, and the training that a U.S. Marine must go through before they are allowed to handle a weapon.


5 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Former Marksmanship Instructor Exposes 2nd Amendment Lies - MeidasTouch (Original Post) Rhiannon12866 Jun 2022 OP
If I lived there, he'd have my vote Warpy Jun 2022 #1
Same here! Rhiannon12866 Jun 2022 #3
Oorah, Marine! TomSlick Jun 2022 #2
It doesn't matter what constitutes a militia. asa4ever Jun 2022 #4
Considering that it was ratified in 1791, I'm guessing they weren't considering automatic weapons Rhiannon12866 Jun 2022 #5

Warpy

(111,277 posts)
1. If I lived there, he'd have my vote
Wed Jun 1, 2022, 09:54 PM
Jun 2022

And I would hope that in 2024 he's willing to primary that opportunistic, backstabbing twit Sinema out of a job.

 

asa4ever

(66 posts)
4. It doesn't matter what constitutes a militia.
Thu Jun 2, 2022, 08:02 PM
Jun 2022

The only thing that matters is what the Supreme Court says. According to the Supreme Court, the 2nd Amendment has 2 parts. The first part reads, "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,". That is the only part that is about the militia. The second part says, "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." You may not agree with that, but only the Supreme Court can say what any part of the Consitution means.

Rhiannon12866

(205,544 posts)
5. Considering that it was ratified in 1791, I'm guessing they weren't considering automatic weapons
Fri Jun 3, 2022, 06:07 AM
Jun 2022


BTW, Welcome to DU!
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Video & Multimedia»Former Marksmanship Instr...