My FB rant for the morning.

[Jrlobo]

Jde,

       Glad you had such an intelligent conversation about guns. Unfortunately, your part was defined by their questions and defining their terms. It is they that have to answer questions, not us. We don't need to justify our rights. They need to justify why they should be able to deny us our rights. Not once in your conversation did you put them on any defensive. You just allowed them to keep asking you to defend what is yours. While I personally agree that we need intelligent conversations, I think it is time that we are the questioners and they are the answerers. As much as I "preach" a non-violent solution to this problem, I also preach an aggressive approach. We are dealing with communists, socialists and Democrats (some see no difference) and they will question you to your death if you let them. The polemic is their game and we have to stop playing it on their terms.

[JdePietro]

I understand the core of what you are saying but they are not listening to fact anymore. We have embattled ourselves against politicians that say things like "Pass the bill to learn whats in it" and " Unemployment insurance is the most effective way to bolster job growth."

They are not arguing facts, they are giving out fantasies to anyone who will listen. If you provide a completely offensive argument based off of clear cut facts than you will win the debate hands down every time.........

With everyone who already agrees with you. Cunning my friends, you must intertwine your discussions with facts and a calm pleasant demeanor, feeding off your opponents want for you to slip up and say something boorish. I have been dismissed enough times for bringing up the militia, the founders intent. We don't need to convince each other, you must appeal to their sensibilities. If you dismiss them as low information, ignorant masses with communistic agendas they will dismiss you as a bible thumping ignorant racist redneck with blood lust. Contrary to popular belief we are still the minority in the worst of times. Blood liable pays in folds and we got our work cut out for use. Tolerance and Understanding will by us far more support than stubborn cliche behavior.   

[tombogan03884]

Personally, I don't think it is okay to use our standing army against Americans, no matter what the cause. We have a volunteer army that did not sign up for that purpose. You are not the only one who has read the Federalist Papers. And Smedley not only won 2 Medals of Honor, he was the most decorated Marine of his time. Seems to me he paid his dues to express his opinions as he saw fit, even if I don't agree with them.

What the hell are you talking about ?
If it's this,

Actually, If you read "The Federalist Papers" Hamilton, Jay, and Madison are quite clear that a standing army is a danger to Liberty because it always serves as the regimes tool of oppression.

Only a clueless person would find fault with what I posted .
In the early years of the Republic manning the border defenses against Indian raids and British encroachment was attempted with state militia troops, several things were found wrong with the idea.
Training, equipment, and discipline varied widely between units
Privateers were only available during time of war when they could be when they could be commissioned against a specific enemy,
This left the coast essentially defenseless against pirates and smugglers.
The same training and equipment issues existed at sea as on land .
A total lack of coordination and cooperation between units of bordering states due mostly to lack of unified  command structure.
The economic impact came from the expense to each state in duplicating the efforts of it's neighbors, the competition for various supplies drove up prices since rather than one military purchasing supplies there were 14 competing with each other and when men were called for duty they were not filling their normal place in the economy .
The establishment of the standing Army and Navy allowed a single chain of command running clearly from the President to the sentry on his post, it allowed for standardized training and equipage of forces it created a single purchasing authority that by buying in much greater bulk could get better prices and it allowed for the establishment of Federal Shipyards as at Portsmouth and Armories turning out standardized arms as at Harpers Ferry, or Springfield, and it allowed the establishment of a Military Academy to provide competent Engineers and Officers.
No one but a fool would think that today's forces with their avionics, computers, detectors and other high tech weapons systems could be effectively operated by a strictly militia force.