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.
The Federalist Papers, the Anti-Federalist Papers and the 9th and 10th Amendments to the US Constitution give you everything you need to know for reading the 2nd Amendment properly.
"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" is absolute.
The 9th Amendment tells you that just because a right, like absolute private property rights, isn't mentioned specifically does not mean that the people don't have it. The 9th is your guide to "how" you read the Constitution. It is a document that explains specifically what the government is, what it can do and what it cannot do. It does not define the people or the states, minus state government structure and the people's rights in courts. It only dictates to government. It does not grants rights to people, it takes away power from government.
The 10th Amendment tells you that if you do not see the power specifically enumerated as part of the federal purview, then whatever that is, it belongs to the States and the People. There is no enumeration anywhere in the Constitution that give power to the federal government to infringe upon the right to keep and bear arms. The only mention of the federal government and the right to keep and bear arms is in the 2nd Amendment, where they are specifically prohibited from messing with the right.
The reason I know this about the 9th and 10th Amendments is because I have read the Federalist and Anti-Federalist Papers. This is all explained, quite clearly and extensively, by the people writing it all down at the time.
That's why the 2nd Amendment survives, even in its bruised, battered and often disregarded form. There's simply too much actual evidence of what exactly the Founders intended, specifically where preventing future tyranny was concerned.
And more than anything else, the right to keep and bear arms indeed preserves all the others. When you watch the people of whatever 3rd World craphole is currently switching over to dictatorship, what do you actually see? You see men with guns oppressing men/women/children WITHOUT guns. Since the dawn of time, the people with weapons oppress the ones without them. Oh sure, you can have hundreds of years of relative peace/stability/democracy/etc, but even in the greatest empire the world has ever seen - the Romans - when it went south, it was centurions and praetorians with weapons carrying out the will of a tyrant.
Americans like to think we have evolved beyond such things, but in "even more civilized" Europe, when the government wants obedience, they have men with guns slap around those without them until obedience is achieved. It takes the smallest nudge to go from quieting down separatists in Catalonia and ending up at Iran's Guardian Council and its Supreme Leader. The...smallest...nudge. And all that stands between a free people and abject tyranny is the people possessing a legitimate threat to those who would oppress them.
Sure, our military possesses all manner of superior firepower and tech, but ask the US military how hard it has been to defeat lone riflemen in Afghanistan. Oh wait, they never have defeated those lone riflemen, that's right. Turns out a single person with a gun can actually do pretty well for themselves holding off a would be oppressor. Now just imagine if that person is well trained...and has ammo stores...hmmm...
It certainly wasn't. If it's true that the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed, then why as there a need for this part in the 2nd Amendment? A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State... If a person in a militia went insane and threatened to shoot everybody's head off he should of course lose the right to bear arms.
No clue what you are talking about. I think you're better off presenting your own views rather trying to present the views of others.
I don't know about that?
At least I understand exactly what NVplumber was talking about and agree with him 100%. Nowhere did he claim that he was "trying to present the views of others". But from reading many of the comments on this board I'm sure that there are "others" that agree with him as well.
It certainly wasn't. If it's true that the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed, then why as there a need for this part in the 2nd Amendment? A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State... If a person in a militia went insane and threatened to shoot everybody's head off he should of course lose the right to bear arms.
It certainly was especially this part: "The Federalist Papers, the Anti-Federalist Papers and the 9th and 10th Amendments to the US Constitution give you everything you need to know for reading the 2nd Amendment properly."
Apparently you're just to lazy to read it? Or are afraid to read it as it doesn't corroborate your way of thinking?
There are already laws against murder. So what's your point?
The 2nd Amendment does not give anyone the right to murder or threaten to murder anyone.
Your comment makes absolutely no sense at least to me.
I see that you're from Arizona? Me too, moving here was the best decision I could ever make. I've lived here for 10 years and couldn't be happier being away from all the Liberal BS of the northeast. You really have to have lived there to understand how bad things can get when Democrats have absolute power and control over your everyday lives and it's not just about guns.
1 As you may already know that 5 Arizona counties have declared themselves as 2nd Amendment sanctuaries, Apache, Maricopa, Mohave, La Paz and Yavapai. I belong to the Arizona Citizens Defense League (AZCDL) they were instrumental in getting these resolutions passed. I attended two meetings at my home county's board of legislator's meeting along with hundreds of others in support of these measures. There was very little opposition. We have to get even more counties to follow. Hopefully all 15 but I don't have too much hope for Pima County? But many were surprised that Apache and Maricopa counties passed this resolution. I sure am proud to call Arizona our home and of all those who showed up in force to make this happen.
2 At any rate there is a bill SB1625 filed in the Arizona State Senate that would ban practically every semi automatic firearm and high capacity magazine within the state. It's a carbon copy of Virginia's legislation that recently passed within that state. Even though it's unlikely to pass or even come up for a hearing it's something that every freedom loving Arizonan should be aware of especially come election time. If the Democrats ever take control of our legislature we can kiss our 2nd Amendment rights in Arizona goodbye.
3 Micheal Bloomberg will be pouring millions of dollars in advertising to try and accomplish this feat. Turning Arizona into a blue state such as he did in Virginia. We can't let that happen. In addition Mark Kelly (D) is running against Martha McSally (R) for US Senate. If the Republicans lose the senate our chances of securing two more Conservative justices to the Supreme Court will be over. Even if Trump wins the election which is more than likely. Because of their age Ginsburg and Breyer will probably be off the bench during the next 4 years. If all goes well that will give us a 7 to 2 majority on the Supreme Court and the preservation of the 2nd Amendment and Constitutional law for generations to come. November will be thee most important election of our life time.
Hi Ex New Yorker - Yes, I am an Arizona native. I'll put a reply with each of the paragraphs I highlighted.
1 - I have a lot of pro-gun friends in Pima County, it's unfortunate that a lot of voters in Pima and Coconino counties tend to speak for many of us pro-2A folks. Most of such voters are tied in with the University Of Arizona and Northern Arizona University. Pinal county was also declared as a 2A sanctuary by Sheriff Paul Babeu, who was one of the speakers at the 2nd Amendment rally on February 15th at the Arizona Capital, which I attended.
2 - SB1625 has been stopped by many pro-gun legislators and groups (including AZCDL). Yes, we do hold a thin majority in Arizona's house and senate, let's hope the pro-gun majority expands.
3 - Bloomberg dropped out of the race for president but that doesn't mean he's going to stop his anti-gun agenda, which he thinks he can buy and push with his billions. He should have learned by now that he would be wasting his money. US Senate Democrat Kirsten Sinema could not be trusted, neither can Mark Kelly, and McSally has been too silent lately, but I hope that changes before Arizona's primary in August.
You don't have a clue, sorry. The first ten amendments all were designed to limit the powers of Congress. Not the states.
Nonsense.
While the 1st amendment DID only apply to congress (It specifically says in its text "Congress shall make no law..."), the 2nd made no such confinement of its command to only Congress. The 2nd said "Since X is true, the right shall not be restricted or taken away." Since it didn't mention WHO shall not take it away, that meant that the command applied to EVERYBODY. Including Fed govt, states, and local.
Next thing you know, you'll be telling us that while an accused person gets a jury trial if he breaks a Federal law, he DOESN'T get one if he breaks a state or local law (6th amendment).
And while the Fed govt isn't allowed to beat a confession out of a suspect, a state or local govt CAN (5th amendment).
And while A Fed govt agent must get a warrant before entering your house and searching it, a state cop can just walk in any time and search it from top to bottom, whenever he wants, for any reason or no reason (4th amendment).
And on and on.
Are you sure you want to continue this ludicrous dream that the entire BOR originally only applied to the Fed govt?
It didn't... except for the parts that specifically said so, like the 1st amendment.
And later adoption of the 14th amendment changed that, too.
If you can keep droning a false premise about the Bill of Rights, I can keep refuting it by pointing out the ridiculous conclusions that come from your assertions.
Hi Ex New Yorker - Yes, I am an Arizona native. I'll put a reply with each of the paragraphs I highlighted.
1 - I have a lot of pro-gun friends in Pima County, it's unfortunate that a lot of voters in Pima and Coconino counties tend to speak for many of us pro-2A folks. Most of such voters are tied in with the University Of Arizona and Northern Arizona University. Pinal county was also declared as a 2A sanctuary by Sheriff Paul Babeu, who was one of the speakers at the 2nd Amendment rally on February 15th at the Arizona Capital, which I attended.
2 - SB1625 has been stopped by many pro-gun legislators and groups (including AZCDL). Yes, we do hold a thin majority in Arizona's house and senate, let's hope the pro-gun majority expands.
3 - Bloomberg dropped out of the race for president but that doesn't mean he's going to stop his anti-gun agenda, which he thinks he can buy and push with his billions. He should have learned by now that he would be wasting his money. US Senate Democrat Kirsten Sinema could not be trusted, neither can Mark Kelly, and McSally has been too silent lately, but I hope that changes before Arizona's primary in August.
I envy you my friend, if I could have chosen where to be born it would be right here in Arizona. Word's can't describe how much we (wife and I) love this state. But I've always been fascinated with the Great American Southwest, Arizona in particular, and have wanted to live out here since a young age.
Pinal County too? That's great, I wasn't aware of that. So that makes 6 counties, 9 more to go. I'm in Yavapai County we had at least 500 people attend the 1st board meeting with time for about 120 people who could speak. Out of that number maybe 4 spoke out against the resolution. Not as many people showed up at the second meeting but it was still overwhelmingly in our favor.
The problem with bills such as SB1625 is that they lie dormant and in wait for a Democrat administration to eventually pass them. What happened in Virginia should be a wake up call for us all. However and because of the massive pro-gun rally held in Richmond the assault weapons and high capacity magazine bans were temporarily withdrawn. I guess they're gonna' wait and see what November brings? They sure pissed off an awful lot of people though. Something like 90 of Virginia's 95 counties have declared themselves as 2nd Amendment sanctuaries.
I will not under any circumstances vote for Mark Kelly. Or any other Democrat for any public office whatsoever. As far as the US Senate goes that only leaves McSally. The Republicans must keep control of the senate that's the only thing that matters as there will more than likely be two more Supreme Court justices nominated and confirmed. I wasn't too crazy about Flake or McCain but had no other choice then to vote for them. A third party candidate is not an option and only serves to split the vote. Usually that does not end up in our favor.
It certainly wasn't. If it's true that the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed, then why as there a need for this part in the 2nd Amendment? A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State...
There isn't a need for it.
It's explaining to normal Americans why the government is forbidden to restrict or take away that particular individual right.
If that language were omitted from the 2nd, the impact of the 2nd would not be changed. It's still a firm command to the government that they cannot take away or restrict the people's right to KBA.
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.
