Another mass shooting at a Walmart in Virginia

[Valentina327]

We have progressed but not nearly as fast as we should have. And we aren’t even there yet. People can dismiss Jefferson’s rantings of claiming that Black people were inferior claiming it was the times. But that’s not true. Plenty of people during that time period knew it was wrong.

Using quotes from Jefferson to justify gun use in 2022 is ridiculous. We don’t live like that anymore. The word militia is outdated and not used to describe our military. It’s like people quoting Donald Trump in 200 years. It shouldn’t happen.

Yeah... That's all true. He was racist as hell.

The progression of this country has changed the goal to include everyone when it comes to freedom.

Thomas Jefferson was a white supremacist. Read this paper I’m going to link. His words…..


If you don’t read Jefferson’s writings I’ll try and summarize - He starts off with talking about literal color of skin and why he determines that Whites are more attractive and smell better.

Sample of what Jefferson thought “ But never yet could I find that a black had uttered a thought above the level of plain narration; never see even an elementary trait of painting or sculpture. In music they are more generally gifted than the whites with accurate ears for tune and time, and they have been found capable of imagining a small catch. Whether they will be equal to the composition of a more extensive run of melody, or of complicated harmony, is yet to be proved.
https://www.americanyawp.com/reader/the ... inia-1788/

Militia doesn't refer to the military at all. It was never used to describe our military. Militia is a gathering of citizens, not military trained individuals. It's a back up.

Maybe this is why your ilk is so outraged all the time. You don't know what words mean. You think a militia is the same as the military. You think we live in a democracy instead of a Constitutional Republic.

[Della]

We have progressed but not nearly as fast as we should have. And we aren’t even there yet. People can dismiss Jefferson’s rantings of claiming that Black people were inferior claiming it was the times. But that’s not true. Plenty of people during that time period knew it was wrong.

Using quotes from Jefferson to justify gun use in 2022 is ridiculous. We don’t live like that anymore. The word militia is outdated and not used to describe our military. It’s like people quoting Donald Trump in 200 years. It shouldn’t happen.

Yeah... That's all true. He was racist as hell.

The progression of this country has changed the goal to include everyone when it comes to freedom.

Militia doesn't refer to the military at all. It was never used to describe our military. Militia is a gathering of citizens, not military trained individuals. It's a back up.

Maybe this is why your ilk is so outraged all the time. You don't know what words mean. You think a militia is the same as the military. You think we live in a democracy instead of a Constitutional Republic.

You better check your facts.

[Deleted User 1990]

We have progressed but not nearly as fast as we should have. And we aren’t even there yet. People can dismiss Jefferson’s rantings of claiming that Black people were inferior claiming it was the times. But that’s not true. Plenty of people during that time period knew it was wrong.

Using quotes from Jefferson to justify gun use in 2022 is ridiculous. We don’t live like that anymore. The word militia is outdated and not used to describe our military. It’s like people quoting Donald Trump in 200 years. It shouldn’t happen.

Militia doesn't refer to the military at all. It was never used to describe our military. Militia is a gathering of citizens, not military trained individuals. It's a back up.

Maybe this is why your ilk is so outraged all the time. You don't know what words mean. You think a militia is the same as the military. You think we live in a democracy instead of a Constitutional Republic.

You better check your facts.

What is she incorrect about?


What is a militia?

Federal and state laws generally use the term “militia” to refer to all able-bodied residents between certain ages who may be called forth by the government to defend the United States or an individual state. See 10 U.S.C. § 246. When not called forth, they are sometimes referred to as the “unorganized militia.” A group of people who consider themselves part of the able-bodied residents referred to as members of the militia under state or federal law is not legally permitted to activate itself for duty. A private militia that attempts to activate itself for duty, outside of the authority of the state or federal government, is illegal.

[Deleted User 1990]

Or the Down Home definition:

Our Military to everyone else: Y’all can get whatever guns you want and train as much as you want, but don’t do shit until we say go…

[Della]

Militia doesn't refer to the military at all. It was never used to describe our military. Militia is a gathering of citizens, not military trained individuals. It's a back up.

Maybe this is why your ilk is so outraged all the time. You don't know what words mean. You think a militia is the same as the military. You think we live in a democracy instead of a Constitutional Republic.

You better check your facts.

What is she incorrect about?


What is a militia?

Federal and state laws generally use the term “militia” to refer to all able-bodied residents between certain ages who may be called forth by the government to defend the United States or an individual state. See 10 U.S.C. § 246. When not called forth, they are sometimes referred to as the “unorganized militia.” A group of people who consider themselves part of the able-bodied residents referred to as members of the militia under state or federal law is not legally permitted to activate itself for duty. A private militia that attempts to activate itself for duty, outside of the authority of the state or federal government, is illegal.

You read this, yes?

[Deleted User 1990]

You better check your facts.

What is she incorrect about?


What is a militia?

Federal and state laws generally use the term “militia” to refer to all able-bodied residents between certain ages who may be called forth by the government to defend the United States or an individual state. See 10 U.S.C. § 246. When not called forth, they are sometimes referred to as the “unorganized militia.” A group of people who consider themselves part of the able-bodied residents referred to as members of the militia under state or federal law is not legally permitted to activate itself for duty. A private militia that attempts to activate itself for duty, outside of the authority of the state or federal government, is illegal.

You read this, yes?

Yes…

Anyone of legal age and ability.

Like you know how all the guys sign up for the draft when they’re 18? All of them can say they’re militia.

[Lemons]

Slavery of the Africans is not what he's referring to. It seems you're being intentionally obtuse.

Jefferson's mention of slavery was with respect to citizens not being a slave to their government. That's what they escaped by coming here - tyranny. It's what they sacrificed lives and money and homes for. It's what 2A is about. We need to keep our government in check in order to insure that they recall that THEY work for US.

This is just embarrassing. No comments after reading a statement that claims Jefferson wasn’t referring to “slavery of the Africans” ?

I'm sorry you're embarrassed. Don't be.

Read what I linked and tell me what it’s about. Otherwise you’re just echoing what Bob was saying.

[Lemons]

I know there are different interpretations on what he meant. Some scholars say it was deliberately vague. I still don’t see where he wrote about fear of being a white slave.

This was a start. Four years later Pennsylvania became the first state to create a law that no more babies would be born slaves. After that Massachusetts was the first to change their constitution banning slavery outright followed by surrounding states. This was all happening shortly after the speech.

I believe you about fear of slavery, I can imagine most governments were back then. I just don’t see it in writing like you claim.

He wasn’t…


He was referring to the slavery of who he considered his own people, who he considered full fledged Americans, and was basing his ideas on how to avoid slavery on the many different ways he saw it accomplished in his time…


He was racist, and owned slaves…that doesn’t mean he had bad ideas when it came to not becoming a slave himself.

To clarify, what I linked is his personal rantings of how he really felt about “all men created equal”. The issue of Black slaves in America was so volatile that the country ended up in civil war over it. During his lifetime Massachusetts was the first state to ban slavery, inspired by his “all men are equal” speech. On the other end Southern states changed their constitutions to read “all freemen” instead of “all men”.

What speech are you talking about when you say it’s about White slavery?

He was talking about his White friends, not everyone. Massachusetts had a lot more to say about it than hearing a speech they liked…



https://news.stanford.edu/press-release ... nged-time/

On July 4, 1776, when the Continental Congress adopted the historic text drafted by Thomas Jefferson, they did not intend it to mean individual equality. Rather, what they declared was that American colonists, as a people, had the same rights to self-government as other nations. Because they possessed this fundamental right, Rakove said, they could establish new governments within each of the states and collectively assume their “separate and equal station” with other nations. It was only in the decades after the American Revolutionary War that the phrase acquired its compelling reputation as a statement of individual equality.

[Deleted User 1990]

When I said “never becoming a slave” I was referring to how it was a Britannia age of government creation here…

They were making a new form of Britain but without a king, and taxed their way. That’s why everything was named New Jersey, New England, New York…

This was the charter, the charter of the land
And guardian angels sang this strain
Rule Britannia, Britannia, rule the waves
Britons never, never, shall be slaves
Rule Britannia, Britannia, rule the waves
Britons never, never, shall be slaves

I know there are different interpretations on what he meant. Some scholars say it was deliberately vague. I still don’t see where he wrote about fear of being a white slave.

This was a start. Four years later Pennsylvania became the first state to create a law that no more babies would be born slaves. After that Massachusetts was the first to change their constitution banning slavery outright followed by surrounding states. This was all happening shortly after the speech.

I believe you about fear of slavery, I can imagine most governments were back then. I just don’t see it in writing like you claim.

To clarify, what I linked is his personal rantings of how he really felt about “all men created equal”. The issue of Black slaves in America was so volatile that the country ended up in civil war over it. During his lifetime Massachusetts was the first state to ban slavery, inspired by his “all men are equal” speech. On the other end Southern states changed their constitutions to read “all freemen” instead of “all men”.

What speech are you talking about when you say it’s about White slavery?

He was talking about his White friends, not everyone. Massachusetts had a lot more to say about it than hearing a speech they liked…



https://news.stanford.edu/press-release ... nged-time/

On July 4, 1776, when the Continental Congress adopted the historic text drafted by Thomas Jefferson, they did not intend it to mean individual equality. Rather, what they declared was that American colonists, as a people, had the same rights to self-government as other nations. Because they possessed this fundamental right, Rakove said, they could establish new governments within each of the states and collectively assume their “separate and equal station” with other nations. It was only in the decades after the American Revolutionary War that the phrase acquired its compelling reputation as a statement of individual equality.

[Deleted User 1990]

And now someone has to call me out for it originally being called New Amsterdam, not New York lol…