At least 16 people dead and suspect at large after multiple incidents in area of Lewiston, Maine

mixed martial arts is an effective plan against someone with a semi automatic.

 

Yeah, this man was/is considered one of the best jujitsu practitioners of all time.

Leandro Lo - Wikipedia

 

An organized milita was not a thing, but the thing. Some founders might have been good with unorganized militias but there is zero recognition of them in the constitution. OTOH, there is an unmistakable effort in the constitution to define a militia, its necessity, & how to organize it between the states & fed.

 

Knew as soon as I saw Hannity’s name that it was going to be a stupid discussion about martial arts, because he loves to tell people how he trains lol

 

I hear ya. Most of the guys I know who are the most into guns were either hunters or prior military. One outlier is a guy I know who used to be a competitive shooter.

 

The key adjective is "disarmed". Any examples of private ownership of armed fighter jets or helicopter gunships? By the way going back to the post in which you quoted George Mason advocating for members of the militia to keep their weapons at home, you do recall that the reference was to an organized militia under governmental control (it was reference to the county militia which assume was part of the state militia), not an ad hoc militia. Although I'm not sure whether it's still the case Switzerland used to require (not just allow) members it's equivalent of the Army reserve to keep their individual weapons at home, noting that Switzerland requires universal military service and required that the weapons be stored unloaded under lock and key.

 

Why is the 2A language in the Bill of Rights which did not apply to the states instead of in the body of the Constitution itself?

 

Some may think this makes Hannity sound silly. But in addition to the mixed martial arts training, he's also watched a lot of action movies. He knows the bad guys always miss or at worse wing you, and that that if you're clever and tough enough, you can always overcome them with your mixed martial arts. He has played out in his head lots of times.

Obviously, the victims of mass shootings are just not tough and trained and mixed martial arts like Hannity.

 

He's dominating the dojo Kramer style

 

The challenge to owning armed fighter jets and attack helicopters in most cases isn’t really legality - you absolutely can own them and most of the armaments - it’s cost and finding someone willing to sell the stuff to you.

In terms of legal prohibitions, most rockets, bombs, autocannon rounds, etc. are destructive devices under the NFA that you would have to pay a tax stamp on (and in a lot of those cases would have to have an explosives license and serious explosive storage bunkers to legally possess), but if you were dedicated enough and had the money and either the ability to build it yourself or someone willing to sell it to you, could likely legally own.

Your biggest challenges for arming it, assuming money and availability were no object, are guided air-to-air missiles (there’s a specific federal statute making guided missiles designed to destroy aircraft illegal) and, somewhat ironically, the auto-cannon (not because of any prohibition on heavy military arms, but because of the 1986 machine gun ban and the fact there are few to no transferable ones that were legally registered prior to 1986 out there).

 

A karate man

 

The unorganized militia wasn't defined in the constitution because it wasn't relevant to the constitution and the federal government. Doesn't mean they didn't recognize it. Kind of falls under something that the 10th amendment would cover.

Again, it isn't that people are not allowed to own those things. It's that you can't find anyone to sell the munitions to you, and that there is some necessary structure in place for that to happen that is prohibitively expensive for most. The arms themselves would fall under "Destructive devices" in the NFA. In order to own things that classify as "Destructive Devices", you must pay a $200 tax per item and you must have appropriate safe storage facilities. People back in those days could own warships, cannons, and the like if they had the funding, and the government would actually reimburse them for privateering. You can still own a cannon today, it isn't even a regulated item. Short of nuclear weaponry, if someone wanted to manufacture their own missiles or other munitions for a jet, tank, or helicopter, there isn't any law in place that would stop someone from doing so provided they had the not insignificant amount of funding required to do so and were not on some sort of prohibited persons list, and (for the jet or the chopper) they could find someone to teach them how to fly them. I would guess the number of people in the US who could actually afford to do so without completely wrecking their standard of living is likely very, very few.

ETA: and yes, Ben is correct that the cannon could not be fully automatic (unless you were to go get yourself an SOT and went "into the business" of manufacturing them, but that would be stupid to do as an individual for a variety of reasons) and the guided missiles.

 

Question apart from the 'who gets guns' discussion. Card is an Army reservist who was training at West Point when commanders became concerned about his behavior and safety. They called state police who took him to a hospital.
Why would the Army not do that themselves?

 

If you are a reservist I dont think you are necessarily under military jurisdiction

 

The constitution speaks to the powers of the federal government, and only the powers of the federal government. It was drafted and the bill of rights was added to explicitly limit the government as a condition of ratification. The absence of any particular thing in the constitution does not by definition mean it wasn't recognized by the founders, just that it wasn't relevant to the document of the constitution for its purpose. Article 8 confers rights and responsibilities of the government with regard to utilization of the organized militia. The second amendment confers a right on the people, just as the 1st and 4th explicitly do using the same phrasing "The right of the people". In order that the militia (the whole of the people) might be well-functioning or in working order, people could keep and bear arms. It was not just allowed, but expected that people had working firearms and learned how to shoot. There was no police or standing army so the people provided for their own security, both at an individual and a collective level, and both type of usage were protected. This was a huge concern of the anti-federalists who pushed for the bill of rights, while the federalists saw the concerns as relatively trivial, common sense, and assumed.

 

Apparently Robert Card's body has been found. Suicide I assume.
Suspect in Maine mass shooting is dead, senior law enforcement sources say

 

Implicit in the Constitution is that notion that the militia is a state military organization under the command of the state governor. The Constitution explicitly empowers Congress to federalize the militia and when federalized designates the president as commander-in-chief of the militia, same as he is of the Army and Navy (the other branches of the military were created much later). I would agree that the Second Amendment did assume that members of the militia would keep their weapons at home.

 

Suicide confirmed.