exact wording of the 2nd

[John Galt]

Let's not forget our own states protection of this unalienable right, which is even more plain written that the 2nd Amendment.
Article I Section 32 - The people shall have a right to bear arms, for the defense of themselves and the State.

God Bless our forefathers!

 

[MTC]

Let's not forget our own states [STRIKE]protection[/strike] violation of this supposedly unalienable right, which is even more plain written that the 2nd Amendment.
Article I Section 32 - The people shall have a right to bear arms, for the defense of themselves and the State.

IC 35-47-2
Chapter 2. Regulation of Handguns Unconstitutional

IC 35-47-2-1
Carrying a handgun without a license or by person convicted of domestic battery
Sec. 1. (a) Except as provided in subsection (b) and section 2 of this chapter, a person shall not carry a handgun in any vehicle or on or about the person's body, except in the person's dwelling, on the person's property or fixed place of business, without a license issued under this chapter being in the person's possession. Violation - Article I Section 32

 

[indykid]

IC 35-47-2
Chapter 2. Regulation of Handguns Unconstitutional

IC 35-47-2-1
Carrying a handgun without a license or by person convicted of domestic battery
Sec. 1. (a) Except as provided in subsection (b) and section 2 of this chapter, a person shall not carry a handgun in any vehicle or on or about the person's body, except in the person's dwelling, on the person's property or fixed place of business, without a license issued under this chapter being in the person's possession. Violation - Article I Section 32

Thanks, I was just about to point this out also. The other thing is that in order to be able to protect the state, why doesn't Indiana tell the feds to go pound more sand and allow us all to own full auto weapons without having to pay the federal blackmail fee?

Article I Section 32 - The people shall have a right to bear arms, for the defense of themselves and the State.

Of course, after rereading that, we have the right to bear arms, not to keep them.

 

[MTC]

Thanks, I was just about to point this out also. The other thing is that in order to be able to protect the state, why doesn't Indiana tell the feds to go pound more sand and allow us all to own full auto weapons without having to pay the federal blackmail fee?

Because, at present, Big Brother can beat up little brother.

Of course, after rereading that, we have the right to bear arms, not to keep them.

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

 

[Bill of Rights]

They won't have to. The further violation and destruction of the often overlooked part of the 4th Amendment through electronic and technological means, not yet fully realized and implemented, will serve the purposes of surveillance and control adequately enough to make the physical quartering of soldiers unnecessary.

I believe the purpose of quartering soldiers that way was not surveillance but housing. It prevented the army from having to build barracks.

 

[MTC]

I believe the purpose of quartering soldiers that way was not surveillance but housing. It prevented the army from having to build barracks.

Yes. Yes, of course. Understood. Agreed. Not trying to be argumentative at all, but since you made a speculative statement about the future, just wanted to add perspective from inside the mind of the tyrant, the totalitarian, the megalomaniac.
Nothing to see here.

 

[Bill of Rights]

Yes. Yes, of course. Understood. Agreed. Not trying to be argumentative at all, but since you made a speculative statement about the future, just wanted to add perspective from inside the mind of the tyrant, the totalitarian, the megalomaniac.
Nothing to see here.

Fair enough.

 

[John Galt]

Just one of the many reasons I love this site and that is the depth of observation by its members. Thanks for pointing out my oversite guys. Do you think that with the upcoming swing to the right in this falls elections that we could push for a Vermont style permit?

 

[Lex Concord]

Just one of the many reasons I love this site and that is the depth of observation by its members. Thanks for pointing out my oversite guys. Do you think that with the upcoming swing to the right in this falls elections that we could push for a Vermont style permit?

You mean "You're not a felon or otherwise prohibited by existing law so, yeah, carry, what do we care?"

That would be great, though I think having an Alaska-style optional permit for those who seek reciprocity in other states would be beneficial.

Anyone can carry in VT, but Vermonters can't carry in other states because there is no permit. How such a liberal state got the 2A right, I'll probably not soon understand.

 

[Bill of Rights]

You mean "You're not a felon or otherwise prohibited by existing law so, yeah, carry, what do we care?"

That would be great, though I think having an Alaska-style optional permit for those who seek reciprocity in other states would be beneficial.

Anyone can carry in VT, but Vermonters can't carry in other states because there is no permit. How such a liberal state got the 2A right, I'll probably not soon understand.

Not only does VT not have a permit to carry... They have NEVER had one.

As for how they got that right, it came from our Creator. They kept it because that's what the Founders wanted; VT was just the only state to hold to that fine standard.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[shibumiseeker]

I believe the purpose of quartering soldiers that way was not surveillance but housing. It prevented the army from having to build barracks.

Only partially. He had one part correct: the reason soldiers were quartered in private homes were in part so the military didn't have to pay to house and feed their men (in those days armies tended to live off the land as they traveled and wrought destruction on the locals), but also in part to help suppress popular insurrection and guerrilla warfare.

 

[MTC]

...but also in part to help suppress popular insurrection and guerrilla warfare.

And what better way to do this than by preemptively installing the eyes and/or ears of The State [as an omnipresent entity, not necessarily the American geographical division] into your home, a virtual soldier, or spy, as it were.
I didn't mean to drift off-topic, or to say that one part of the Bill of Rights was more important than another, but because BoR brought it up, wanted to give a possible explanation of what has become, or will become of the 3rd Amendment.

 

[Bill of Rights]

What will become of the 3A? That's easy. See... if they are sleeping in my house and eating food from my kitchen... there is a longstanding rule of wisdom: Never *urinate* off someone who knows where you sleep or prepares your food. I would require extreme provocation to do something nasty to American soldiers. I hold no such compunction about a foreign occupying force.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[rambone]

Let me google that for you

 

[Marc]

You mean you don't have a tattoo of the 2nd?

hmmm that doesnt sound like a bad idea... seriously