Exactly what and why was the 2nd amendment written like it is

[Daryl Hunt]

I won't look at today. I will look at the time around 1790.

Militia Act of 1792
Every citizen, so enrolled and notified, shall, within six months thereafter, provide himself with a good musket or firelock, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints, and a knapsack, a pouch, with a box therein, to contain not less than twenty four cartridges, suited to the bore of his musket or firelock, each cartridge to contain a proper quantity of powder and ball; or with a good rifle, knapsack, shot-pouch, and powder-horn, twenty balls suited to the bore of his rifle, and a quarter of a pound of powder; and shall appear so armed, accoutred and provided, when called out to exercise or into service, except, that when called out on company days to exercise only, he may appear without a knapsack.

First we need to look at who was a Citizen in 1790s. In the 1790s, ALL Blacks even free Blacks were prohibited from owning and carrying firearms. All People even whites that would not swear allegiance to the newly formed United States were prohibited from owning or carrying fire arms. Women were prohibited from owning or carrying firearms. Bonded Slaves, even whites were prohibited from owning or carrying firearms of any kind. It all pretty much boiled down that a Citizen was a Free White Male Land Owner deemed to be in good standing with the Existing Government both Stated and Federal Governments. It's been estimated that only about 8% of the population from that time met the full requirement to own, possess and carry firearms legally. Remember, more than half of the population of that time either supported the Crown or leaned heavily in that direction. The Newly Formed Colonist Government did exactly what the British Government tried to do themselves.

There were two rebellions that made the Militia Act of 1792 to be written and adopted. The Shays Rebellion of 1786-1787 and the Whiskey Rebellion 1791-1794. While neither amounted to much, the founding fathers were scared to death that something else might come up that might endanger the newly formed Government so they adopted the 2nd Amendment as it was written since there was no Standing Army to prevent any decent resurrection from becoming successful. It was left up to each state individually to provide the militias to prevent it from happening. As long as the states agreed and didn't go to war with each other.

Using the original definition, if you don't own your House, Farm or Business and you don't completely and blindly support our current Government then are not a Citizen in Good Standings and will not be afforded the right to own, posses or carry any form of Firearms. Oh, and you must be a Free White Male as well.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Applying 21st Century mores to 18th Century thinking is an exercise in vanity.

The militia is bound to the right. The right is not bound to the militia.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Yup so using your logic we ave no right to privacy with computers phones or any electronics of any kind right?

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Applying 21st Century mores to 18th Century thinking is an exercise in vanity.

The militia is bound to the right. The right is not bound to the militia.

If you want to follow the meaning of the 2nd amendment, the Militia is bound to the Government which should be neither right nor left, it just is.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Yup so using your logic we ave no right to privacy with computers phones or any electronics of any kind right?

I just stated facts and history. Once you learn why the 2nd amendment was written as it was and still is it all of a sudden makes sense. But it made sense only then.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Yup so using your logic we ave no right to privacy with computers phones or any electronics of any kind right?

I just stated facts and history. Once you learn why the 2nd amendment was written as it was and still is it all of a sudden makes sense. But it made sense only then.

No you are trying to claim that rules made then do not apply now cause they are old and I called you on it.

 

[danielpalos]

I won't look at today. I will look at the time around 1790.

Militia Act of 1792
Every citizen, so enrolled and notified, shall, within six months thereafter, provide himself with a good musket or firelock, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints, and a knapsack, a pouch, with a box therein, to contain not less than twenty four cartridges, suited to the bore of his musket or firelock, each cartridge to contain a proper quantity of powder and ball; or with a good rifle, knapsack, shot-pouch, and powder-horn, twenty balls suited to the bore of his rifle, and a quarter of a pound of powder; and shall appear so armed, accoutred and provided, when called out to exercise or into service, except, that when called out on company days to exercise only, he may appear without a knapsack.

First we need to look at who was a Citizen in 1790s. In the 1790s, ALL Blacks even free Blacks were prohibited from owning and carrying firearms. All People even whites that would not swear allegiance to the newly formed United States were prohibited from owning or carrying fire arms. Women were prohibited from owning or carrying firearms. Bonded Slaves, even whites were prohibited from owning or carrying firearms of any kind. It all pretty much boiled down that a Citizen was a Free White Male Land Owner deemed to be in good standing with the Existing Government both Stated and Federal Governments. It's been estimated that only about 8% of the population from that time met the full requirement to own, possess and carry firearms legally. Remember, more than half of the population of that time either supported the Crown or leaned heavily in that direction. The Newly Formed Colonist Government did exactly what the British Government tried to do themselves.

There were two rebellions that made the Militia Act of 1792 to be written and adopted. The Shays Rebellion of 1786-1787 and the Whiskey Rebellion 1791-1794. While neither amounted to much, the founding fathers were scared to death that something else might come up that might endanger the newly formed Government so they adopted the 2nd Amendment as it was written since there was no Standing Army to prevent any decent resurrection from becoming successful. It was left up to each state individually to provide the militias to prevent it from happening. As long as the states agreed and didn't go to war with each other.

Using the original definition, if you don't own your House, Farm or Business and you don't completely and blindly support our current Government then are not a Citizen in Good Standings and will not be afforded the right to own, posses or carry any form of Firearms. Oh, and you must be a Free White Male as well.

an open book test? only the "dumb ones" don't get it.

 

[danielpalos]

Applying 21st Century mores to 18th Century thinking is an exercise in vanity.

The militia is bound to the right. The right is not bound to the militia.

Our Second Amendment is about what is Necessary to the security of a free State.

 

[flacaltenn]

I won't look at today. I will look at the time around 1790.

Militia Act of 1792
Every citizen, so enrolled and notified, shall, within six months thereafter, provide himself with a good musket or firelock, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints, and a knapsack, a pouch, with a box therein, to contain not less than twenty four cartridges, suited to the bore of his musket or firelock, each cartridge to contain a proper quantity of powder and ball; or with a good rifle, knapsack, shot-pouch, and powder-horn, twenty balls suited to the bore of his rifle, and a quarter of a pound of powder; and shall appear so armed, accoutred and provided, when called out to exercise or into service, except, that when called out on company days to exercise only, he may appear without a knapsack.

First we need to look at who was a Citizen in 1790s. In the 1790s, ALL Blacks even free Blacks were prohibited from owning and carrying firearms. All People even whites that would not swear allegiance to the newly formed United States were prohibited from owning or carrying fire arms. Women were prohibited from owning or carrying firearms. Bonded Slaves, even whites were prohibited from owning or carrying firearms of any kind. It all pretty much boiled down that a Citizen was a Free White Male Land Owner deemed to be in good standing with the Existing Government both Stated and Federal Governments. It's been estimated that only about 8% of the population from that time met the full requirement to own, possess and carry firearms legally. Remember, more than half of the population of that time either supported the Crown or leaned heavily in that direction. The Newly Formed Colonist Government did exactly what the British Government tried to do themselves.

There were two rebellions that made the Militia Act of 1792 to be written and adopted. The Shays Rebellion of 1786-1787 and the Whiskey Rebellion 1791-1794. While neither amounted to much, the founding fathers were scared to death that something else might come up that might endanger the newly formed Government so they adopted the 2nd Amendment as it was written since there was no Standing Army to prevent any decent resurrection from becoming successful. It was left up to each state individually to provide the militias to prevent it from happening. As long as the states agreed and didn't go to war with each other.

Using the original definition, if you don't own your House, Farm or Business and you don't completely and blindly support our current Government then are not a Citizen in Good Standings and will not be afforded the right to own, posses or carry any form of Firearms. Oh, and you must be a Free White Male as well.

Missed it by a mile sonny.. The 2nd was written to COMBINE 2 concepts. That of allowing standing militias as a right reserved to the States and localities and consisting "the people" with the restrictions you noted. However, the second combined explicit right was for EVERY CITIZEN to be allowed to "bear arms". It's all documented in the history of the writing of the US Constitution and the contemporaneous explanations of the Founders.

 

[danielpalos]

Drafting the militia means, grabbing anyone, not just gun lovers; it could mean, emptying our jails to lower costs.

 

[The Professor]

I won't look at today. I will look at the time around 1790.

Militia Act of 1792
Every citizen, so enrolled and notified, shall, within six months thereafter, provide himself with a good musket or firelock, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints, and a knapsack, a pouch, with a box therein, to contain not less than twenty four cartridges, suited to the bore of his musket or firelock, each cartridge to contain a proper quantity of powder and ball; or with a good rifle, knapsack, shot-pouch, and powder-horn, twenty balls suited to the bore of his rifle, and a quarter of a pound of powder; and shall appear so armed, accoutred and provided, when called out to exercise or into service, except, that when called out on company days to exercise only, he may appear without a knapsack.

First we need to look at who was a Citizen in 1790s. In the 1790s, ALL Blacks even free Blacks were prohibited from owning and carrying firearms. All People even whites that would not swear allegiance to the newly formed United States were prohibited from owning or carrying fire arms. Women were prohibited from owning or carrying firearms. Bonded Slaves, even whites were prohibited from owning or carrying firearms of any kind. It all pretty much boiled down that a Citizen was a Free White Male Land Owner deemed to be in good standing with the Existing Government both Stated and Federal Governments. It's been estimated that only about 8% of the population from that time met the full requirement to own, possess and carry firearms legally. Remember, more than half of the population of that time either supported the Crown or leaned heavily in that direction. The Newly Formed Colonist Government did exactly what the British Government tried to do themselves.

There were two rebellions that made the Militia Act of 1792 to be written and adopted. The Shays Rebellion of 1786-1787 and the Whiskey Rebellion 1791-1794. While neither amounted to much, the founding fathers were scared to death that something else might come up that might endanger the newly formed Government so they adopted the 2nd Amendment as it was written since there was no Standing Army to prevent any decent resurrection from becoming successful. It was left up to each state individually to provide the militias to prevent it from happening. As long as the states agreed and didn't go to war with each other.

Using the original definition, if you don't own your House, Farm or Business and you don't completely and blindly support our current Government then are not a Citizen in Good Standings and will not be afforded the right to own, posses or carry any form of Firearms. Oh, and you must be a Free White Male as well.

Missed it by a mile sonny.. The 2nd was written to COMBINE 2 concepts. That of allowing standing militias as a right reserved to the States and localities and consisting "the people" with the restrictions you noted. However, the second combined explicit right was for EVERY CITIZEN to be allowed to "bear arms". It's all documented in the history of the writing of the US Constitution and the contemporaneous explanations of the Founders.

Well stated. Concise, and spot on.

The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) agrees with you. Here are the relevant
portions of the SCOTUS decision in DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA et al. v. HELLER (Decided June 26, 2008):

Held:

1. The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. Pp. 2–53.

(a) The Amendment’s prefatory clause announces a purpose, but does not limit or expand the scope of the second part, the operative clause. The operative clause’s text and history demonstrate that it connotes an individual right to keep and bear arms. Pp. 2–22.

(b) The prefatory clause comports with the Court’s interpretation of the operative clause. The “militia” comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense. The Antifederalists feared that the Federal Government would disarm the people in order to disable this citizens’ militia, enabling a politicized standing army or a select militia to rule. The response was to deny Congress power to abridge the ancient right of individuals to keep and bear arms, so that the ideal of a citizens’ militia would be preserved. Pp. 22–28.

(c) The Court’s interpretation is confirmed by analogous arms-bearing rights in state constitutions that preceded and immediately followed the Second Amendment. Pp. 28–30.

(d) The Second Amendment’s drafting history, while of dubious interpretive worth, reveals three state Second Amendment proposals that unequivocally referred to an individual right to bear arms. Pp. 30–32.

(e) Interpretation of the Second Amendment by scholars, courts and legislators, from immediately after its ratification through the late 19th century also supports the Court’s conclusion. Pp. 32–47.

(f) None of the Court’s precedents forecloses the Court’s interpretation. Neither United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 542, 553, nor Presser v. Illinois, 116 U. S. 252, 264–265, refutes the individual-rights interpretation. United States v. Miller, 307 U. S. 174, does not limit the right to keep and bear arms to militia purposes, but rather limits the type of weapon to which the right applies to those used by the militia, i.e., those in common use for lawful purposes. Pp. 47–54.

2. Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons. Pp.54–56.

District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Yup so using your logic we ave no right to privacy with computers phones or any electronics of any kind right?

I just stated facts and history. Once you learn why the 2nd amendment was written as it was and still is it all of a sudden makes sense. But it made sense only then.

No you are trying to claim that rules made then do not apply now cause they are old and I called you on it.

If the same rules applied then and now, here are the ones that would be the only ones that would be able to own, purchase and carry firearms.

1. Land Owners
2. Free Men
3. Whites
4. Only those that are in good standings with the current ruling party

Not having all 4 of those would mean that if you do have firearms yours would be confiscated and you would not be able to replace them until the next group of governing group that agrees with you takes office. And you would have to own land, be white and be a Man. Only those that meets all 4 of those criteria would be able to be a member and be required to be in the militia for a given state. If you believe our founding fathers weren't a bunch of bigots you would be wrong.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Drafting the militia means, grabbing anyone, not just gun lovers; it could mean, emptying our jails to lower costs.

No, because if you are in prison, you are cannot be considered a full Citizen therefore under our original fore fathers way of thinking you would not be able to be a citizen and would not be able to own, possess or purchase a firearm.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Drafting the militia means, grabbing anyone, not just gun lovers; it could mean, emptying our jails to lower costs.

No, because if you are in prison, you are cannot be considered a full Citizen therefore under our original fore fathers way of thinking you would not be able to be a citizen and would not be able to own, possess or purchase a firearm.

That would mean that they only apply to the Free White Men. And that would mean that it would only apply to about 8% of the population then and now. Everyone else would not be able to buy, possess or use firearms. IS that what you want?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Drafting the militia means, grabbing anyone, not just gun lovers; it could mean, emptying our jails to lower costs.

 

[danielpalos]

Drafting the militia means, grabbing anyone, not just gun lovers; it could mean, emptying our jails to lower costs.

No, because if you are in prison, you are cannot be considered a full Citizen therefore under our original fore fathers way of thinking you would not be able to be a citizen and would not be able to own, possess or purchase a firearm.

The right of the People!

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Drafting the militia means, grabbing anyone, not just gun lovers; it could mean, emptying our jails to lower costs.

No, because if you are in prison, you are cannot be considered a full Citizen therefore under our original fore fathers way of thinking you would not be able to be a citizen and would not be able to own, possess or purchase a firearm.

The right of the People!

Even today, most states do not allow convicted felons to ever own firearms ever again. It's not a Federal thing, it's a state thing.

 

[danielpalos]

Drafting the militia means, grabbing anyone, not just gun lovers; it could mean, emptying our jails to lower costs.

No, because if you are in prison, you are cannot be considered a full Citizen therefore under our original fore fathers way of thinking you would not be able to be a citizen and would not be able to own, possess or purchase a firearm.

The right of the People!

Even today, most states do not allow convicted felons to ever own firearms ever again. It's not a Federal thing, it's a state thing.

We have a Second Amendment.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Drafting the militia means, grabbing anyone, not just gun lovers; it could mean, emptying our jails to lower costs.

No, because if you are in prison, you are cannot be considered a full Citizen therefore under our original fore fathers way of thinking you would not be able to be a citizen and would not be able to own, possess or purchase a firearm.

The right of the People!

Even today, most states do not allow convicted felons to ever own firearms ever again. It's not a Federal thing, it's a state thing.

We have a Second Amendment.

Which only applies to the Federals. It does not apply to the States according to the SCOTUS. If you want the 2nd amendment to apply to the states you need to get it into the Congress and have it rewritten to include the states and have the President to sign it into law. The founding fathers never intended for it to apply to the states.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Wrong the 14th amendment solved that problem incorporating the amendments into the States.