Sprout
Let's look at the 2nd Amemdment's purposes...
Tue Oct 3, 2017 9:55am
192.86.118.14

Among all the lawful reasons the people should have a right to keep and bear arms, the Amendment specifically notes militia service as a reason why that right is necessary to a free state...

So, let's look at that SPECIFIC role briefly... Historically militia's will serve WITH standing military forces. I would certainly agree that militiamen are unlikely to be expected to arrive bringing tanks, howitzers, fighter jets, bombers, or helicopters with them. This is because historically militiamen are most often used in basic INFANTRY roles. I would say a militiamen COULD be expected to arrive equipped for THAT role. What type rifle would an infantrymen be reasonably expected to carry?

And as to travel, while I get you want to focus on Trump, you might want to consider that the US gov't has had travel restrictions in place under every single president in my life.... Think Cuba.

  • Let's correct that post:PH🙄👀EY, Tue Oct 3 9:50am
    The Second Amendment does not imply that the Citizenry ought to have personal ownership of howitzers and tanks. Other than that I see no need for gun laws except perhaps regarding FULLY automatic... more
    • Let's look at the 2nd Amemdment's purposes... — Sprout, Tue Oct 3 9:55am
      • " Historically militia's will serve WITH standing military forces. I would certainly agree that militiamen are unlikely to be expected to arrive bringing tanks, howitzers, fighter jets, bombers, or... more
        • EVERBODY trained to whatever degree possible. Sometimes they had weapons, sometimes they were just farmers with pitchforks, but they were trying to prepare for if the German military did cross the... more
        • The US military hasn't TRULY been stressedSprout, Tue Oct 3 11:10am
          since WWII in terms of running EVERTHING they have to the max. Building weapons and vehicles as fast as possible, training recruits as fast as possible, pushing everything across the ocean as fast as ... more
        • Given the incredible high tech dmpowermentPH☠☠EY, Tue Oct 3 10:46am
          to the push button warriors, and the incredible massive destruction including conventional weapons, your post has the slight pallor of an antique concept. A responding militia in your scenario is... more
          • Yeah, that's what I saidJeeves, Tue Oct 3 10:58am
            " A responding militia in your scenario is passť, and irrelevant. " Exactly.
            • Different roles though...Sprout, Tue Oct 3 11:36am
              If we look at total war scenario's there are plenty of jobs that won't need front line troops, but would be better done by someone with a rifle who knows how to do it.
      • I was not specifically targeting PH👀EY, Tue Oct 3 10:21am
        Trump. But used his imperial edict as a example . The ban on travel to Cuba was unconstitutional. And a lot less complicated to grasp than the dodgey hair splitting parsing of terms re. the Second... more