Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You are complicating the matter. The people have the right to form a militia, this is not the same as a paid army, this is clear as they did not use "militia" and "army" interchangeably. In fact, the Generals of the Continental Army were not always terribly fond of the state militias.
The militia is supposed to be 'well regulated' and the regulations were passed the following year.
Whatever the regulations say, that's what congress intended. You can read them for yourself, it is on the internet in several places.
There is no indication here that any gang of buddies can call themselves a militia and satisfy the requirements.
The militia is supposed to be 'well regulated' and the regulations were passed the following year.
Whatever the regulations say, that's what congress intended. You can read them for yourself, it is on the internet in several places.
There is no indication here that any gang of buddies can call themselves a militia and satisfy the requirements.
I read it twice and must have missed the part where it talks about "well regulated, so please post that part.
Historians have said about "well regultaed"
"The words "well regulated" had a far different meaning at the time the Second Amendment was drafted. In the context of the Constitution's provisions for Congressional power over certain aspects of the militia, and in the context of the Framers' definition of "militia," government regulation was not the intended meaning. Rather, the term meant only what it says, that the necessary militia be well regulated, but not by the national government. To determine the meaning of the Constitution, one must start with the words of the Constitution itself. If the meaning is plain, that meaning controls. To ascertain the meaning of the term "well regulated" as it was used in the Second Amendment, it is necessary to begin with the purpose of the Second Amendment itself. The overriding purpose of the Framers in guaranteeing the right of the people to keep and bear arms was as a check on the standing army, which the Constitution gave the Congress the power to "raise and support."
As Noah Webster put it in a pamphlet urging ratification of the Constitution, "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe." George Mason remarked to his Virginia delegates regarding the colonies' recent experience with Britain, in which the Monarch's goal had been "to disarm the people; that [that] . . . was the best and most effectual way to enslave them." A widely reprinted article by Tench Coxe, an ally and correspondent of James Madison, described the Second Amendment's overriding goal as a check upon the national government's standing army: As civil rulers, not having their duty to the people duly before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as the military forces which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirmed by the next article in their right to keep and bear their private arms.
Historians have also said"
" When the Constitution was ratified, the Framers unanimously believed that the "militia" included all of the people capable of bearing arms."
Our rights are inalienable and whatever is decreed on our Bill of Rights along with the Amendments over-ride any and all decisions made in opposition to what liberties they permit. Any official in government that acts outside of those interests is wrong and their decisions should be swiftly reversed, their qualifications to hold their office questioned.
I highly support fire-arm rights. Without fire-arms America would be weakened and vulnerable.
The militia is supposed to be 'well regulated' and the regulations were passed the following year.
Whatever the regulations say, that's what congress intended. You can read them for yourself, it is on the internet in several places.
There is no indication here that any gang of buddies can call themselves a militia and satisfy the requirements.
Quote:
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.
Quote:
A bill of rights, sometimes called a declaration of rights or a charter of rights, is a list of the most important rights to the citizens of a country. The purpose is to protect those rights against infringement from public officials and private citizens.
So tell me how how "well regulated" makes "right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" obsolete?
Because that's what you're arguing. You believe you must have a organized and paid Army before "to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" is applicable.
Do you honestly believe the Bill of Rights was trying to protect our Army's right to have weapons? Do you even understand what the purpose of the Bill of Rights was?
The 2nd amendment clearly states that the individual has a right to form militias, and they also have the right to weapons. There's nothing else to it.
The militia is supposed to be 'well regulated' and the regulations were passed the following year.
Whatever the regulations say, that's what congress intended. You can read them for yourself, it is on the internet in several places.
There is no indication here that any gang of buddies can call themselves a militia and satisfy the requirements.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quick Enough
I read it twice and must have missed the part where it talks about "well regulated, so please post that part.
Historians have said about "well regultaed"
"The words "well regulated" had a far different meaning at the time the Second Amendment was drafted. In the context of the Constitution's provisions for Congressional power over certain aspects of the militia, and in the context of the Framers' definition of "militia," government regulation was not the intended meaning. Rather, the term meant only what it says, that the necessary militia be well regulated, but not by the national government. To determine the meaning of the Constitution, one must start with the words of the Constitution itself. If the meaning is plain, that meaning controls. To ascertain the meaning of the term "well regulated" as it was used in the Second Amendment, it is necessary to begin with the purpose of the Second Amendment itself. The overriding purpose of the Framers in guaranteeing the right of the people to keep and bear arms was as a check on the standing army, which the Constitution gave the Congress the power to "raise and support."
As Noah Webster put it in a pamphlet urging ratification of the Constitution, "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe." George Mason remarked to his Virginia delegates regarding the colonies' recent experience with Britain, in which the Monarch's goal had been "to disarm the people; that [that] . . . was the best and most effectual way to enslave them." A widely reprinted article by Tench Coxe, an ally and correspondent of James Madison, described the Second Amendment's overriding goal as a check upon the national government's standing army: As civil rulers, not having their duty to the people duly before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as the military forces which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirmed by the next article in their right to keep and bear their private arms.
Historians have also said"
" When the Constitution was ratified, the Framers unanimously believed that the "militia" included all of the people capable of bearing arms."
The Constitution should always prevail. The problem with The Law is courts or lawyers often disagree. If The Law was simple to interpret we wouldn't need appeals courts or a country full of lawyers.
The Constitution should always prevail. The problem with The Law is courts or lawyers often disagree. If The Law was simple to interpret we wouldn't need appeal courts or a country full of lawyers.
I'm of the opinion that the law should be simple to understand for everybody.
I understand my fellow liberals not liking the 2nd amendment. I can even understand them wanting to change or remove it. However, what has been going on, is that they are trying to twist and redefine it to legitimize the passage of more gun control laws without actually changing the amendment.
The militia is supposed to be 'well regulated' and the regulations were passed the following year.
Whatever the regulations say, that's what congress intended. You can read them for yourself, it is on the internet in several places.
There is no indication here that any gang of buddies can call themselves a militia and satisfy the requirements.
It does not say anything about who regulates them, some can regulate themselves. Wanna see militias in action try banning all guns, amazing how many would pop out of the wood work.
It does not say anything about who regulates them, some can regulate themselves. Wanna see militias in action try banning all guns, amazing how many would pop out of the wood work.
Anything not reserved to the federal government reverts to the states. And that is exactly what happened.
People can not form their own militias and feel that they have satisfied the requirements of the 2nd amendment. It requires a federal or state oversight.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
