Constitutional Debate

YoungRepublican

Active Member
Dec 21, 2012
624
80
28
New Jersey
How do you interpret the Second Amendment "As passed by the Congress:
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.
As ratified by the States and authenticated by Thomas Jefferson, Secretary of State:
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." If you are not part of a militia does this even apply to you? How can we interpret this almost 300 years later? Lets try and keep it civil.
 
How do you interpret the Second Amendment "As passed by the Congress:
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.
As ratified by the States and authenticated by Thomas Jefferson, Secretary of State:
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." If you are not part of a militia does this even apply to you? How can we interpret this almost 300 years later? Lets try and keep it civil.

"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." Pretty simple and easy to understand. It means the Constitution has given you the right to own personal firearms.
 
How do you interpret the Second Amendment "As passed by the Congress:
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.
As ratified by the States and authenticated by Thomas Jefferson, Secretary of State:
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." If you are not part of a militia does this even apply to you? How can we interpret this almost 300 years later? Lets try and keep it civil.

"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." Pretty simple and easy to understand. It means the Constitution has given you the right to own personal firearms.
I get that.. I guess my question is, how do you adress the part about "a well regualted militia" I am really trying to form an opinion on this so Im not currently leaning either way. I believe in the Constitution, and I believe it needs to be interpreted correctly. Do we need to form a militia in order to abide by the guidelines regulated by the founding fathers?
 
it means we can have militias that don't take orders from DC and we all get to own any weapon we can afford as well as any kind of ammo.


Franklin was clear; It's to ensure that we can violently overthrow the government, if need be and prevent a tyranny b/c we can be heavily armed.
 
How do you interpret the Second Amendment "As passed by the Congress:
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.
As ratified by the States and authenticated by Thomas Jefferson, Secretary of State:
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." If you are not part of a militia does this even apply to you? How can we interpret this almost 300 years later? Lets try and keep it civil.

"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." Pretty simple and easy to understand. It means the Constitution has given you the right to own personal firearms.
I get that.. I guess my question is, how do you adress the part about "a well regualted militia" I am really trying to form an opinion on this so Im not currently leaning either way. I believe in the Constitution, and I believe it needs to be interpreted correctly. Do we need to form a militia in order to abide by the guidelines regulated by the founding fathers?

Our present day militia is called the National Guard.
 

Forum List

Back
Top