I've posted a few quotes regarding the 2A and a link for them. IMHO, the 2A refers to the "right of the people" in the context of their being citizens and not part of any government organized body. James Madison's Federalist Papers quote about a militia being all able bodied citizens with firearms gathering to repel a central government army out of control would seem to confirm this intention when the 2A was written. Does anybody else see this differently or have more thoughts to post?
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:
Leading Federalist James Madison wrote: Let a regular army, fully equal to the resources of the country, be formed; and let it be entirely at the devotion of the federal government; still it would not be going too far to say, that the State governments, with the people on their side, would be able to repel the danger. The highest number to which, according to the best computation, a standing army can be carried in any country, does not exceed one hundredth of the whole number of souls; or one twenty-fifth part of the number able to bear arms. This proportion would not yield, in the United States, an army of more than twenty-five or thirty thousand men. To these would be opposed a militia amounting to near half a million of citizens with arms in their hands, officered by men chosen from among themselves, fighting for their common liberties, and united and conducted by governments possessing their affections and confidence. It may well be doubted, whether a militia thus circumstanced could ever be conquered by such a proportion of regular troops.
__________________
Jesus Christ--The reason for the season!
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read this in English, thank a veteran.
If you're certain you know everything, there's little opportunity to learn anything.
It is important thatAmericansunderstand the term"the people" as used in the BOI. It means just that, "the people" as in all private citizens. Theanti-gunners know this as well as we do but they choose to lie, whine, caterwaul and obfuscate.
Well I'm not a Supreme Court justice so my opinion doesn't swing any real weight. But since we're all entitled to an opinion, here's mine.
Recall that, at the time the Constitution was created, this new country had just come about as a result of the treasonousoverthrow of the lawful government of King George. We don't think about this very much now outside of celebrating Independence Day. But the reality of the revolution was fresh in the minds of the founders.
So put yourself in their place. One of the annoyances perpetrated by the British Army was their attempts to confiscate the colonists' guns. Because of this they sincerely wanted to include a clause in the new Constitution that would preclude the same actions by the new government. On the other hand, they were cautious about creating the impression that any group of ale fueled individuals had the same right to go out and attempt to replace an unsatisfactory government with one more to their liking.
So you preceed your right to keep and bear arms statement with a clause stipulating that it is a WELL REGULATED militia that is necessary to the security of a free state. You then follow this clause mentioning a WELL REGULATED militia with the clause confirming the the right of the people, not the previously mentioned militia, to not only keep, but to bear arms.
Now this clause itself requires further analysis. Beyond the fact that the clause refers to "the people" rather than the militia or members of the militia, a careful reader will note that the clause does not grant, but affirms the right to keep and bear arms. Furthermore, the clause not only affirms this right, it assumes it and states that it SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.
Our problem now is that we have allowed "sensible gun control" and even encouraged it for generations now. Remember the scenes in those old westerns where the sheriff required everyone coming into town to check their guns? I'll betcha not one of us ever had the thought that, hey, that's unconstitutional. Of course, it didn't seem objectionable because it seemed to only apply to the bad guys. In fact, it seemed to make good sense.
So, unfortunately, we have grown up with the idea that it's a great idea for the sheriff to make us check our guns when we come into town and let him and his deputies take care of the bad guys. Sadly, this may be effective in the movies, but in real life the concept doesn't work as well. Worse yet, the idea that the 2nd amendment doesn't really mean exactly what it says has been firmly ingrained in our society's psyche.
What's even more disingenuous (ironic doesn't seem to completely explain it) is that all of the other 9 rights in the BOR are clearly understood to be rights for individual people, not groups, organizations or "state militias." Hmmmm.....
__________________
Jesus Christ--The reason for the season!
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read this in English, thank a veteran.
If you're certain you know everything, there's little opportunity to learn anything.
Many of the early states had laws requiring private able-bodied citizens to own and be able to use a firearm. In some cases, if they could not afford one, they were provided one and required to be able to use, if needed.
The early founders of our nationwere more concerned thatnot enough private citizens would own firearms that some future (now) politicians or courts would use this as an excuse for a strong central gov't to have an overpowering standing army that could be used to restrict or eliminate all citizens' rights. That's also the reason for other restrictions that the military are not be deployed and used against ourcitizens within our country.
They were very wise people to see in the future that we'd be up against those like they had fought to free themselves from in old Europe who'd try to take away our freedoms.
__________________
MinnFinn
"Now there you go again..." "I'm not going to hold your youth and inexperience against you." -- Ronald Reagan
Although the founders it seem, could have made this more clear, there is no doubt in my mind after what they had been through, that their intention was that all the people had the right to own guns if not the responsibility to do so.
There was a brief piece in the paper today about a recent court decision that is supposed to have reversed the Washington D.C. ban on handgun ownership. Looks like it will obviously go to higher courts. The report stated that a new approach by the anti-gun crowd may be to concede that gun ownership rights are inherent in the constitution, but that public safety overrides this right in some instances. This is nothing new to me. A marginally intelligent and educated person can clearly see the intent of the 2nd amendment. Subsequent challenges to it are clearly influenced by issues of public safety. Its kind of like condoning "safety checkpoints" on the road, which many view as unconstitutional search and seizure, for the sake of keeping the roads safe.
__________________
"Shoot him again....his soul is still dancing"
The term militia, as defined here by Merriam Webster, implicitly means "the people":
One entry found for militia.
Quote:
Main Entry: mi·li·tia
Pronunciation: m&-'li-sh&
Function: noun
Etymology: Latin, military service, from milit-, miles
1 a : a part of the organized armed forces of a country liable to call only in emergency
b : a body of citizens organized for military service
2 : the whole body of able-bodied male citizens declared by law as being subject to call to military service
Seems pretty cut and dried to me.
__________________
Kevin Haendiges
NAHC Life Member
NRA Member
Wildlife Forever Member
GOA Member
Buckmasters Member
http://hunting-indiana.com
If you are seriously interested in this topic, you need to read what the US Justice Department advised relative to the interpretation of the Second Amendment in 2004. This appears to me to be a very well researched legal study of the proper interpretation and construction of the Second Amendment.
2nd Amendment--Individual RKBA??
