grunts and guano gun control

Mediguano Grunt, there always seems to be argument on the constitutional right to bear arms. So tell me if that also says there is a constitutional right to actually use them? They are ornamental, are they not?

The Grunt “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” You can read this in a number of ways – from downplaying the first part to focusing on the first part to limit/expand the meaning. Clearly, “the people” (individuals or the collection?) have the right to keep and bear arms, though for what purpose is a tad bit vague; personal use or to just to support a ‘well regulated’ militia (for a free STATE – also nation?). Not sure I see anything here about ornamental uses…

Mediguano The legal definition of “to bear” includes the following: bear (Adduce), verb acknowledge, acknowledge openly, adjure, admit, affirm, afford proof of, allege, allude to, argue, ascertain, assent, assert, assert absolutely, asseverate, assure, attest, authenticate, aver, avouch, avow, bring forward, bring to light, bring up, call to mind, certify, cite, claim, contend, corroborate, declare, declare to be fact, demonstrate, denote, depone, depose, display, document, elucidate, emphasize, endorse, establish, evidence, evince, exemplify, exhibit, expose, express, furnish evidence, give evidence, give information, give one’s word, give witness, guarantee, have evidence, imply, indicate, inform, introduce, invoke, involve, maintain, make a statement, make an assertion, make eviient, make reference to, make solemn, manifest, name, plead, pledge, point out, point to, present, proclaim, produce the evidence, profess, promulgate, propound, prove, publish, ratify, refer to, represent, show, signify, stand firm, state as fact, state on oath, stipulate, submit, subscribe, substantiate, sustain, swear, take one’s oath, testify, validate, verify, vindicate, vouch for, vow, warrant, witness to .

Mediguano Sometimes we think we understand the implications whereas, more often than not, we don’t. Such is the nature of law. Another point is whether we should or can declare the general populace as “militia”.

The Grunt I see display and exhibit in your list – kinda points to ornamental. Though I also see demonstrate which points to using them. No help there.

The Grunt Per Wiki: A militia generally refers to an army or other fighting force that is composed of non-professional fighters; citizens of a nation or subjects of a state or government that can be called upon to enter a combat situation, as opposed to a professional force of regular soldiers or, historically, members of the fighting nobility. – individuals from the general populace make up a militia but militia does not include all individuals in the general populace.

The Grunt “Necessary” : so important that you must (required by a rule or law) have it. So, the security of a free state demands the state must have a well regulated militia. People are given the right to keep/bear arms. It doesn’t say just to support a militia, it says shall not be infringed – no limits.

Mediguano Demonstrate. Interesting. An active sense to be considered in the context of “arms”. To that here is a legal definition: ARMS. Any thing that a man wears for his defense, or takes in his hands, or uses in his anger, to cast at, or strike at another. Co. Litt. 161 b, 162 a; Crompt. Just. P. 65; Cunn. Dict. h.t. .

Mediguano Provided anything we choose to use in anger may be supportive. Lovely

Mediguano I always respect a “necessary” and angry militia. Shouldn’t we all?

Mediguano Blasting away is definitely evident.

The Grunt One thought is that anyone should be allowed to own ANY weapon they want – up to and including nuclear warheads (well, maybe not that big) – BUT, they should also be held ultimately responsible for ANY ACT that is committed using that weapon, whether they did it or not. Put some responsibility on weapons owners for proper use of their weapons. Unfortunately, this implies that all weapons be registered and tracked for this to work and that won’t work at all…

Mediguano Registration is not at issue though. Size of object isn’t either for that matter.

The Grunt If registering won’t work then limiting is the next popular option – which is

Mediguano The term militia is limiting.

The Grunt Face it, we’re doomed to 2nd amendment arguments for the life of the nation.

Mediguano As we have for the past several years.

Mediguano Good commentary Grunt!

The Grunt Sometimes my bullshit filter breaks and I spew like crazy… Sometimes I even believe what I say…

Mediguano Don’t we all! Sounded informed though didn’t it? Hope the observers of the unobserved observers enjoyed it as well (I think I’m gonna spew on that one).

The Grunt Per wiki, a militia is composed of non-professional fighters. I’m thinking that sounds more like a rabble than security but that untrained rabble has the right to high tech weapons. Sounds a bit scary when you think about it…

The Grunt We probably pinged a number of NSA search subroutines on this thread…

Mediguano That or DHS. There are families that may be considered militia…

The Grunt and organizations

Mediguano Going to sleep on that one! G’night Grunt!

The Grunt  G’nite – I’ll be up for a while yet, reading more BS to fuel more spews…

Mediguano To summarize, a militia, not as defining the general populace of governance, may display albeit not necessarily use arms against another so as to infringe upon their individual right to the pursuit of life, liberty, and freedom. Back to my original comment about being “ornamental”.

Mediguano Definitely not a pretty “picture”.

Mediguano Feel free to fill in the “gaps”. It’s unlikely you and I cleared the mud.

The Grunt I’ll vote for high muzzle velocity ornaments any day… clearing mud? I’d rather stir it up.

Mediguano Doesn’t matter what you display. Of course, now that we have brought up the issue of display, are arms in fact concealable? To be carried on yet another day……

The Grunt sure they are, ask Syria… uh, yeah, to be continued on another day…

Mediguano That to bear includes declarative, registration is acceptable. Negates my comment above.

Mediguano Peace, love, and spit wads. Aloha.

The Grunt Sound advice: Buy guns now, argue legality later… huevos rancheros amigo…

The Grunt BTW, all arguments should be taken with a complete salt lick…

Mediguano . Au revoir, amigo,

AngerManagement Bat



Considering the statistics on the image provided (Wikipedia reports US literacy rate is 99%), here are selected sections from the ACA. Feel free to comment.

“Fruitcakes in the kitchen

Fruitcakes on the bus

There’s a little bit of Fruitcake left in every one of us”

                -Jimmy Buffett





(a) ESSENTIAL HEALTH BENEFITS PACKAGE. — In this title, the term ‘‘essential health benefits package’’ means, with respect to any health plan, coverage that—

(1) provides for the essential health benefits defined by the Secretary under subsection (b);

(2) limits cost-sharing for such coverage in accordance with subsection (c); and

(3) subject to subsection (e), provides either the bronze, silver, gold, or platinum level of coverage described in subsection (d).


(1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to paragraph (2), the Secretary shall define the essential health benefits, except that such benefits shall include at least the following general categories and the items and services covered within the categories:

(A) Ambulatory patient services.

(B) Emergency services.

(C) Hospitalization.

(D) Maternity and newborn care.

(E) Mental health and substance use disorder services, including behavioral health treatment.

(F) Prescription drugs.

(G) Rehabilitative and rehabilitative services and devices.

(H) Laboratory services.

(I) Preventive and wellness services and chronic disease management.

(J) Pediatric services, including oral and vision care.



(1) LEVELS OF COVERAGE DEFINED. — The levels of coverage described in this subsection are as follows:

(A) BRONZE LEVEL.— A plan in the bronze level shall provide a level of coverage that is designed to provide benefits that are actuarially equivalent to 60 percent of the full actuarial value of the benefits provided under the plan.

(B) SILVER LEVEL.— A plan in the silver level shall provide a level of coverage that is designed to provide benefits that are actuarially equivalent to 70 percent of the full actuarial value of the benefits provided under the plan.

(C) GOLD LEVEL.— A plan in the gold level shall provide a level of coverage that is designed to provide benefits that are actuarially equivalent to 80 percent of the full actuarial value of the benefits provided under the plan.

(D) PLATINUM LEVEL. — A plan in the platinum level shall provide a level of coverage that is designed to provide benefits that are actuarially equivalent to 90 percent of the full actuarial value of the benefits provided under the plan.


(A) IN GENERAL. — Under regulations issued by the Secretary, the level of coverage of a plan shall be determined on the basis that the essential health benefits described in subsection (b) shall be provided to a standard population (and without regard to the population the plan may actually provide benefits to).


§ 1302 (f) CHILD-ONLY PLANS.—If a qualified health plan is offered through the Exchange in any level of coverage specified under subsection

(d), the issuer shall also offer that plan through the Exchange in that level as a plan in which the only enrollees are individuals who, as of the beginning of a plan year, have not attained the age of 21, and such plan shall be treated as a qualified health plan.



(1) IN GENERAL.—A health plan not providing a bronze, silver, gold, or platinum level of coverage shall be treated as meeting the requirements of subsection (d) with respect to any plan year if—

(A) the only individuals who are eligible to enroll in the plan are individuals described in paragraph (2); and

(B) the plan provides—

(i) except as provided in clause (ii), the essential health benefits determined under subsection (b), except that the plan provides no benefits for any plan year until the individual has incurred cost-sharing expenses in an amount equal to the annual limitation in effect under subsection (c)(1) for the plan year (except as provided for in section 2713); and

(ii) coverage for at least three primary care visits.

(2) INDIVIDUALS ELIGIBLE FOR ENROLLMENT.—An individual is described in this paragraph for any plan year if the individual—

(A) has not attained the age of 30 before the beginning of the plan year;

(B) has a certification in effect for any plan year under this title that the individual is exempt from the requirement under section 5000A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 by reason of—

(i) section 5000A(e)(1) of such Code (relating to individuals without affordable coverage); or

(ii) section 5000A(e)(5) of such Code (relating to individuals with hardships).


§ 3403\1899A SSA


‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—[As revised by section 10320(a)(1)(G)]

For purposes of this section, the Medicare per capita growth rate for an implementation year shall be calculated as the projected 5-year average (ending with such year) of the growth in Medicare program spending (calculated as the sum of per capita spending under each of parts A, B, and D).

‘‘(ii) REQUIREMENT.—The projection under clause (i) shall—

‘‘(I) to the extent that there is projected to be a negative update to the single conversion factor  applicable to payments for physicians’ services under section 1848(d) furnished in the proposal year or the implementation year,  assume that such update for such services is 0 percent rather than the  negative percent that would otherwise apply; and

(II) take into account any delivery system reforms or other payment changes that have been enacted or published in final rules but not yet implemented as of the making of such calculation.

Frog bat -Mediguano