What does Article II of the Bill of Rights mean to you ?
Quote:
ARTICLE II
A well-regulated militia being necessary to a free state,
the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed
What does this mean to you guys ? I know what I feel it means, I was just wondering what "The Membership" feels on this issue. How far does this go ? Are we allowed only certain types of firearms ? Should we be limited to a certain number of firearms ? What are your thoughts ?
RE: What does Article II of the Bill of Rights mean to you ?
Well regulated militia-leaves the power to defend against invaders, both foriegn and domestic, including our own government if they try to go against what our country stands for, to the people if neccassary and not just the military.
Right of the people to keep and bear arms-This gets somewhat more tricky.When the bill of rights was written they had no concept of the weapons we would have today.I think the definition of arms is unclear, does it just mean guns or should we all have the right to put missile silos in our back yards?If you have a refrigerator full of anthrax spores is it a chemical weapon or just excersising your right to bear arms?Should I be able to refine uranium in my basement?Going by the loosest definition of the terms these things would all be legal weapons.
The only problem with the opposing side of that argument is when the bill of rights was written the standard firearms were what are considered today as antiques, even the advanced versions like the inline muzzleloader are available for sale without any paperwork.We would be a well regulated militia with access only to flintlock or matchlock firearms.Theres a lot of middleground there between the firearms of then and today.This is just if you take the definition and timeline of this quite literaly which most people do not.
All that aside a guns no more dagerous then its owner, I dont care if every household in America has fully automatic rifles with 100 round clips and everyone in Walmarts carrying a handgun.To my thinking these things are all well within the bill of rights as long as your still eligible to own and carry weapons{legaly a citizen, not a felon etc....}.Look at the big issue made out of .50 cal rifles a year or two ago.They wanted them outlawed yet theyve only been used in a handfull of crimes in this countries history.More crimes have been committed with pellet guns then with these yet the politicians and media played them up to be the biggest evil this side of a nuclear warhead.There is a line as to what should be legal to own, but most firearms dont cross it.
RE: What does Article II of the Bill of Rights mean to you ?
Quote:
The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed
It would seem self explanatory to anyone other than liberals and tyrants .
Side note to Petasux: Our forebears dealt with weapons that to them were the state of the art and dreamed of better ones . Leonardo DaVinci envisioned the machinegun over 500 years ago , only the state of technology prevented it from being a reality . They knew that more powerful weapons would one day come along , and they wrote this article that way knowing it .
__________________
Kevin Haendiges
NAHC Life Member
NRA Member
Wildlife Forever Member
GOA Member
Buckmasters Member
http://hunting-indiana.com
RE: What does Article II of the Bill of Rights mean to you ?
Quote:
ORIGINAL: petasux
Well regulated militia-leaves the power to defend against invaders, both foriegn and domestic, including our own government if they try to go against what our country stands for, to the people if neccassary and not just the military.
Right of the people to keep and bear arms-This gets somewhat more tricky.When the bill of rights was written they had no concept of the weapons we would have today.I think the definition of arms is unclear, does it just mean guns or should we all have the right to put missile silos in our back yards?If you have a refrigerator full of anthrax spores is it a chemical weapon or just excersising your right to bear arms?Should I be able to refine uranium in my basement?Going by the loosest definition of the terms these things would all be legal weapons.
The only problem with the opposing side of that argument is when the bill of rights was written the standard firearms were what are considered today as antiques, even the advanced versions like the inline muzzleloader are available for sale without any paperwork.We would be a well regulated militia with access only to flintlock or matchlock firearms.Theres a lot of middleground there between the firearms of then and today.This is just if you take the definition and timeline of this quite literaly which most people do not.
I think petasux got it right in his first sentence.
On the issue of the flintlock being the weapon at the time. I would have to say that in order for us to protect ourselves against foriegn or domestic invaders, our right would be to arm ourselves with equivilant weapons to what we would be up against. If it was supposed to be limitted it wouldn't have said "arms", it would have been written more specific like "guns" or "flintlocks"or "bows" or "speers"......
Now fora personto have a missle silo in their backyard would be a little far feched and I would wager that if you had/wanted one, you probably have a lot of other issues to work out too.
RE: What does Article II of the Bill of Rights mean to you ?
In order to better understand the intent of the Second Amendment and the reality of life then, (and in many ways now too) one shouldnot forget the Militia Actof 1792.
__________________
Days Full Of Clays...
NWTF, DU, SCI
RE: What does Article II of the Bill of Rights mean to you ?
Quote:
ORIGINAL: bergall
Quote:
ARTICLE II
A well-regulated militia being necessary to a free state,
the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed
What does this mean to you guys ? I know what I feel it means, I was just wondering what "The Membership" feels on this issue. How far does this go ? Are we allowed only certain types of firearms ? Should we be limited to a certain number of firearms ? What are your thoughts ?
Does it matter anymore??? I don't think so,No one has the balls to do anything here to protect their rights or country....Everyone is talking BS and that is all that is going on.. No one is protecting this country from invadeing forces now is there??? Oh yes we are being invaded,When you get hundreds of illegals crossing in from mexico everyday,Thats an invasion...And all we do is sit back and bitch about it because we don't want to leave our families or lose our jobs or jus to damn scared to go out west and show them we won't take this BS.... Yep,it's all over now boys and girls,The government is not afraid of us but we are afraid of them...And thats the truth...
RE: What does Article II of the Bill of Rights mean to you ?
I've been reading the responses to this thread, and except for JoeA, it seems there are varying degrees of comprehension of what this issue is all about.
I must admit, I had to look up the Militia act of 1792, and found it does not have anything to do with Article II, but rather, the formation, maintenance and governance of the militia which is to be made up of all "able bodied white males" between the ages of 18 and 45 years.
That's all fine and good, but my personal knowledge of Article II from various sources defines it thus:
"A Well regulated militia being necessary to a free state...."
At the time of it's writing, common usage of 'well regulated' meant well-trained. A well-regulated militia was recognized as those potential defenders/combatants who would be trained to be proficient in the handling of arms. Period. The 'militia' is not defined here, but the amendment recognizes the existance of a trained militia as being necessary to ensure our ability to defend ourselves from agressors.' Note that NONE of the amendments GRANTS a right...each one RECOGNIZES a right we have been granted by GOD (or for the heathens among us, we have a 'natural right' which is being recognized). The right exists outside of the ability of men to grant or deny.
"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". The right being recognized as a 'natural right', and as part of the bill of rights "THE PEOPLE" shall not be hindered from the bearing of arms. There is no mention of whether or not we LIKE guns or shooting, and there is no mention of WHICH TYPE of arms we would be granted. The SPIRIT of Article II is that whatever weapons being necessary to guarantee our ability to defend ourselves, these are the ones we NEED to ensure the existence of this, or "FREE STATE". Recent Supreme Court decisions have affirmed that the use of the phrase "THE PEOPLE" refers to the framers' intent to make this an INDIVIDUAL right, not, as the gun-grabbers would have it, as a 'COLLECTIVE RIGHT" not to be practiced by individuals but rather by those duly authorized by the government to posess such items. This is patently false, and the Supreme Court has borne this out. Further, the 1939 U.S. vs Miller affirmed that BECAUSE certain prohibited weapons were NOT general MILITARY ISSUE, the prohibition on the posession of short-barrelled rifles and sawed-off shotguns would stand.
I agree that in 1776 the framers never conceived of what we have today. I also agree that WHATEVER we have today, Article II refers SPECIFICALLY to military style weapons in the hands of citizen-soldiers. I believe all other interpretations to be invalid; currently, the government is in violation of Article II because our right to keep and bear arms HAS been infringed by any number of local and regional governmental bodies empowered to deny you purchase and posession of firearms. The limitation of this right has been relegated to a 'states rights' issue where, the libbos willl tell you, the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT can't keep you from your guns, but local authority can regulate the exercise of the right.
I don't see where all the 'wiggle room' is coming from which would allow any other interpretations of the few simple words which constitute Article II.
RE: What does Article II of the Bill of Rights mean to you ?
Quote:
Our forebears dealt with weapons that to them were the state of the art and dreamed of better ones . Leonardo DaVinci envisioned the machinegun over 500 years ago , only the state of technology prevented it from being a reality . They knew that more powerful weapons would one day come along , and they wrote this article that way knowing it .
Sort like some other amendments being stomped on now too eh?
__________________
You're only one post away from a federal watch list.
What does Article II of the Bill of Rights mean to you ?
