<html><body bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><div>Regarding "well-regulated militia", the definition of militia that I think most apply is "<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: sans-serif; font-size: 13px; -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.296875); -webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(175, 192, 227, 0.230469); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(77, 128, 180, 0.230469); line-height: 21px; -webkit-text-size-adjust: none; ">The entire able-bodied population of a community, town, county, or state available to be called to arms."</span><br><br></div><div>So there's that . . .</div><div><br>DC</div><div><br>On Nov 5, 2010, at 13:21, keely emerinemix <<a href="mailto:kjajmix1@msn.com">kjajmix1@msn.com</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><div></div><blockquote type="cite"><div>
Not really responding to the "bear/use" argument, but along the same line . . . I continually wonder why the phrase "well-regulated militia" in the Second Amendment doesn't get more discussion. It seems to me that a bunch of poorly informed, angry, hate-fueled, paranoid men crawling around a Kentucky forest in greasepaint with little supervision and lots of powerful arms and ammo can't possibly be a "well-regulated" ANYTHING, much less a "militia." If these types of people would submit to commonsense regulation, order, discipline, accountability and the occasional intrusion of fact, perhaps we could then consider their gun rights in a different light.<br><br>Frankly, these "militias" are an insult to the brave men and women in the U.S. armed forces, and the worst possible argument in favor of wide-open gun ownership and use.<br><br><font style="" color="#8064a2"><font style="font-size: 12pt;" size="3"><font style="" face="Verdana">Keely<br><a href="http://www.keely-prevailingwinds.com">www.keely-prevailingwinds.com</a><br></font></font></font><br><br><br><br>> From: <a href="mailto:dickow@turbonet.com"><a href="mailto:dickow@turbonet.com">dickow@turbonet.com</a></a><br>> To: <a href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com"><a href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">vision2020@moscow.com</a></a><br>> Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2010 12:43:52 -0700<br>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] FW: discharging firearms- was Pres mans-up, Crabtree doesn't<br>> <br>> Thanks, Tom! The Webster online does NOT indicate that 'to bear' (at least<br>> in the case of bearing arms) means also 'to use.' I feel better now.<br>> <br>> Bob Dickow, troublemaker<br>> <br>> -----Original Message-----<br>> From: <a href="mailto:vision2020-bounces@moscow.com">vision2020-bounces@moscow.com</a> [mailto:vision2020-bounces@moscow.com]<br>> On Behalf Of Robert Dickow<br>> Sent: Friday, November 05, 2010 12:01 PM<br>> To: <a href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com"><a href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">vision2020@moscow.com</a></a><br>> Subject: [Vision2020] FW: discharging firearms- was Pres mans-up, Crabtree<br>> doesn't<br>> <br>> Well, I guess if 'to bear' means also 'to use,' then my argument does not<br>> hold. However, I must say that that definition was not my lifelong<br>> understanding of the meaning of 'to bear,' which is means 'to carry,' as in<br>> 'to bear a heavy load of wood.' Using the wood is another thing altogether.<br>> ("Hand me that match, will ya? I want to finish up bearing my wood now.")<br>> <br>> Bob Dickow, troublemaker <br>> <br>> -----Original Message-----<br>> From: <a href="mailto:vision2020-bounces@moscow.com">vision2020-bounces@moscow.com</a> [mailto:vision2020-bounces@moscow.com]<br>> On Behalf Of Garrett Clevenger<br>> Sent: Friday, November 05, 2010 11:32 AM<br>> To: vision2020_moscow.com<br>> Subject: [Vision2020] discharging firearms- was Pres mans-up, Crabtree<br>> doesn't<br>> <br>> Bob writes:<br>> <br>> "But to complicate things, keep in mind that although the Constitution<br>> protects the right to keep and bear arms, it says nothing about our rights<br>> to discharge those arms."<br>> <br>> <br>> >From what my dictionary says, "to bear" means "to hold and use" which in<br>> the case of a firearm seems to me to mean to discharge.<br>> <br>> If a law prevents someone from using their gun, how is that not<br>> unconstitutional? (I'm playing the devil's advocate here)<br>> <br>> I suppose that since there are laws that limit free speech, I suppose<br>> interpretation of our constitutional amendments is very subjective.<br>> <br>> gclev<br>> <br>> =======================================================<br>> List services made available by First Step Internet, <br>> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994. <br>> <a href="http://www.fsr.net">http://www.fsr.net</a> <br>> <a href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com"><a href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com</a></a><br>> =======================================================<br>> <br>> =======================================================<br>> List services made available by First Step Internet, <br>> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994. <br>> <a href="http://www.fsr.net">http://www.fsr.net</a> <br>> <a href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com"><a href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com</a></a><br>> =======================================================<br>> <br>> =======================================================<br>> List services made available by First Step Internet, <br>> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994. <br>> <a href="http://www.fsr.net">http://www.fsr.net</a> <br>> <a href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com"><a href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com</a></a><br>> =======================================================<br>
</div></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><div><span>=======================================================</span><br><span> List services made available by First Step Internet, </span><br><span> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994. </span><br><span> <a href="http://www.fsr.net">http://www.fsr.net</a> </span><br><span> <a href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com"><a href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com</a></a></span><br><span>=======================================================</span></div></blockquote></body></html>