Substance_P@lemmy.world to People Twitter@sh.itjust.worksEnglish · il y a 1 moisCome and take itlemmy.worldimagemessage-square251fedilinkarrow-up11.14Karrow-down128
arrow-up11.11Karrow-down1imageCome and take itlemmy.worldSubstance_P@lemmy.world to People Twitter@sh.itjust.worksEnglish · il y a 1 moismessage-square251fedilink
minus-squarecurbstickle@lemmy.dbzer0.comlinkfedilinkarrow-up7arrow-down1·il y a 1 moisIn the context of the time period, it was a replacement for a standing army. As we have one, then obviously that amendment no longer has any meaning then? So we should just remove it. Cool.
minus-squareTb0n3@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3arrow-down7·il y a 1 moisI’m more for disbanding the standing military than disarming the citizenry.
In the context of the time period, it was a replacement for a standing army.
As we have one, then obviously that amendment no longer has any meaning then? So we should just remove it. Cool.
I’m more for disbanding the standing military than disarming the citizenry.
Why not both?
Removed by mod