I want to create a large private city in middle america that can outright ban guns.

Militias aren't standing armies as you claimed in post 136.

 

The militia of the United States, as defined by the U.S. Congress, has changed over time.[1]

During colonial America, all able-bodied men of certain ages were members of the militia.[2] Individual towns formed local independent militias for their own defense.[3] The year before the US Constitution was ratified, The Federalist Papers detailed the founders' vision of the militia.[4][5] The new Constitution empowered Congress to "organize, arm, and discipline" this national military force, leaving significant control in the hands of each state government. Wiki

Abraham Lincoln (Captain, Illinois Militia, 31st Regiment of Militia, Sangamon County -- disbanded with all mustered out, then he enlisted as a private in Jacob Early's independent spy regiment -- again, all mustered out) served 3 months in the Illinois Militia, and when Chief Blackhawk was defeated the final time, the troops were all mustered out and went back to their civilian vocations.

The militia didn't begin as a standing army, as some of it practically is now.

 

Again by who lol?

 

"Dear coastal progressives: Please move to our private compound in the middle of Iowa/Nebraska/South Dakota where guns won't be allowed, completely surrounded by millions of rednecks with lots of guns. Bring your tax dollars".

 

Funny... we have a plan to take a square mile of my sister-in-law's Iowa property and turn it into a fortified self-sufficient community of 200 or so families where everyone is required to own and train with firearms. For the common defense, see. There's a moat, 12' walls, towers every 200 meters, the whole 9 yards.

Maybe the "no guns" community can form up in the next township.

 

Have you made plans for "K(ing) or Q(ueen) and they appoint the Governor general who serves till 65, who then appoints the senators who serve till 65, and then the Executive legislator", or will you take the more classic route of "an anarcho-syndicalist commune, taking it in turns to be a sort of executive officer for the week, but all the decisions of that officer have to be ratified at a special bi-weekly meeting by a simple majority in the case of purely internal affairs but by a two thirds majority in the case of (presumably 'external affairs'"?

 

No. All issues will be resolved in the Thunderdome.

 

Who will pay for Fairy Tale Land? Why would someone move there?

 

Your city and citizens would become an easy target for armed criminals. Or would you have armed police/gaurds? Just d of defeats your whole proposal.

 

The executuve legislator is elected from the representative house in my town not elected by the senate. The senate approves justices and can stop bad legislation

 

How is order kept in this place? What stops people from robbing, raping, and killing? Will you also have knife control? What will stop groups of people from preying on the innocent? What will stop home invasions? Why would a productive person subject themselves to this nonsense? The only defense is to not have anything that anybody else would want? Will you put bones in your daughter's noses and plates in the lips to make them appear ugly to others? You can describe your Eutopia all you want, but how do you make it work safely and to the benefit of the tennants?

I'd rather live in a gated community that is armed to the teeth. I would have neighbors that I can trust to not be victims. If there are no victims around me, the predators will move on. Would you rob a house that has a "gun free zone" sign on the door or a house that has a sign with a picture of a gun that says "We don't call 911"?

 

Such as declaring the hypothetical town being proposed by yourself to be null and void?

 

I think what people in here are trying to tell you is that while sounding glorious to many, it is not feasible. You'd be better off finding an isolated island in the pacific, moving there and setting up shop.

 

That's it in a nutshell. I'd be all for someone trying something like that, but in America people have rights and they have to be respected. Also, he has demonstrated no way of enforcing this system. He won't let people near the fence, he doesn't tell us how people will be protected, he wants to impose absolute authority, he won't even let the people own property. Once they own the property, they can do what they like on it. It just won't work. As you said, he needs to buy an island and try to attract self sufficient people who will work well with others and don't mind having a nanny state. Resources to keep people gainfully employed would be an issue. I don't see how it will work, but maybe he can illuminate me.

 

if someone has a gun and your agents don't-they die. its as simple as that. anti gun utopias need men with guns to enforce their wet dreams.

 

Jonestown, Guyana had men with guns to enforce Jim Jones's wet dreams. The people didn't have guns. Some would have resisted if they had guns.

 

You could indeed.

Will there be police in this town? Will they have guns?

 

He ignored me when I asked. I don't know how he expects the ruling class to control the peons without arming the police.

 

It doesnt matter. No one would move there anyway.

 

A left-topia entirely privately owned... now thats hilarious!

 

Fans of Mao and Che surely understand that they were gun lovers.

 

Try Chicago

 

Just move to California.

They already exist there.

 

The sentiment is still there. The idea of a governing crown makes me sick to my stomach as an American. Just shows your basic totalitarian nature, though. Why would the Governor General not be elected by the people? Is it because you don't trust the people to be totalitarian enough?

 

And nobody in their right mind would move there. Scandinavia works because it's full of Scandinavians. Also, even in Scandinavia are they starting to cut back on social programs. They can't afford it.