I wonder if the atrocities directed against unarmed Israeli civilians

You mean acquire a Federal firearms license?

 

Back on track, I believe I read someplace in the last few days that israel was thinking of loosening up its gun control laws in response to the massacre. I will go search for that

edit-yep
https://thereload.com/newsletter-israel-loosens-gun-laws-in-wake-of-horror/

 

If they'd love it so much then why not lobby Congress to restore the well-regulated militia? Dems don't care about Second Amendment either but at least they don't pretend that they do.

 

Yes, they should so it since they have a realistic threat and all citizens are military trained.

Israeli army is a textbook example of a well regulated militia, as are Finnish and Swiss militaries.

 

Who said that only law abiding citizens should be disarmed? Please provide a quote and source.

 

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State"
People who have fought for years to nullify the constitutional solution to threats like terrorism are in no position to lecture others.

 

We've had a well regulated militia since 1792.

 

Because nothing you propose disarms criminals.

 

If asked to substatiate a claim don't respond with another unsubstantiated claim.

 

Who is in the militia and how is it well-regulated?

 

They did have a militia, - a trained fighting force. When the war broke out in 1812 the US military had less than 7000 men, but about half a million in the militias. Major General Andrew Jackson was the most famous militia commander. Some were better trained than others, and often the militia men marched into battle "without understanding a single principle of elementary tactics". After that war, the US begun to expand the US Army and it was used to fight against the Native Indians. And then there was the Civil War, which changed everything,

 

I'm pretty sure you've been told this before:

"10 U.S. Code § 246 - Militia: composition and classes.
The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.

(b)The classes of the militia are—
(1)
the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2)
the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia."

The unorganized militia has about 60 million men in it.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/246#:~:text=The militia of the United,United States who are members

"Section 8: Powers of Congress
The Congress shall have Power

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress"

https://constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/articles/article-i

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title10/subtitleA/part1/chapter12&edition=prelim

There's the "who is in the militia" and the "who gets to define what 'well-regulated' means".

 

Nothing about individualism opposes structure and organization. Its just that individualists are opposed to be being coerced into participation. The Civil Defense program of the JFK era worked pretty well as a purely voluntary and cooperative system. There just wasn't enough money and power to be consolidated from it, that's why it was replaced with more centralized, authoritative and expensive systems like DHS and FEMA.

 

You said you only want cops and soldiers to have guns, right?

 

Yes. Most young Americans are potential members. The last time the US utilized the militia was the Vietnam war draft, but it could happen again if need be. If the happens, the government will call people to duty and organize, arm, and discipline the troops before sending to harms way. During Vietnam, it means 16 weeks of intense training.

 

The unorganized militia doesn't sound very well-regulated. But I guess you're more concerned about winning an argument than the security of a free state.

 

"The National Guard is the modern Militia reserved to the States by Art. I. 8, cl. 15, 16, of the Constitution... The passage of the National Defense Act of 1916 materially altered the status of the militias by constituting them as the National Guard."
https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-supreme-court/381/41.html

 

Why are you here? You aren't going to change ****.

Unless you're a member of Congress or okanning in running for that office it doesn't matter what you think "well-regulated" means. Only Congress has that authority.

 

This affected the state militia. The unorganized militia is federal. That's why 10 USC 246 is still the law in the US.

 

If the meaning is arbitrary then there wouldn't be any point in saying it's necessary to the security of a free state. Why am I here? To expose hypocrisy.

 

again that nonsense about well regulated somehow eroding a purely negative restriction on a government that was never given any legitimate power over private arms but tell us-should Israel loosen its gun control laws that contributed to so many unarmed citizens being murdered by Islamist terrorists?

 

There are advantages and disadvantages. Maybe loosening gun laws would result in fewer Israelis being murdered by terrorists. But it could also result in more gun suicides, gun accidents, people being murdered in incidents of domestic violence, and school shootings. Here's a study which found that when Israeli adolescents had less access to guns the suicide rate decreased:

"The use of firearms is a common means of suicide. We examined the effect of a policy change in the Israeli Defense Forces reducing adolescents' access to firearms on rates of suicide. Following the policy change, suicide rates decreased significantly by 40%. Most of this decrease was due to decrease in suicide using firearms over the weekend. There were no significant changes in rates of suicide during weekdays. Decreasing access to firearms significantly decreases rates of suicide among adolescents. The results of this study illustrate the ability of a relatively simple change in policy to have a major impact on suicide rates."
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21034205/

 

I'd think getting raped and murdered is more of a concern than some troubled teenagers offing themselves.

 

The Founders didn't feel that the meaning was arbitrary. They recognized both an individual right for self defense and the need to have a militia to protect the state.

 

Did it decrease the non-firearm methods of suicide?