Let's return the original meaning of the second amendment

[JimH52]

We should return to the original meaning of the Second Amendment | OregonLive.com

I support the Second Amendment, but only in its full text. "Well-regulated militias" may need extreme arms, but such arms are a danger to the public in the hands of crazy people. And all of us get crazy occasionally. While we're at it, also ban military sniper rifles. These .50-caliber rifles, with armor-piercing ammunition, can penetrate an inch of armor and are deadly to 1,000 yards. Nor does any citizen need semiautomatic handguns with large-capacity magazines. It's questionable that police forces even need them.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

We should let O decide. He knows what's best for us all.

 

[OODA_Loop]

My State Constitution regulates the State Milita and sets forth the manner in which I can keep and bear arms ?

 

[Mustang]

We should return to the original meaning of the Second Amendment | OregonLive.com

I support the Second Amendment, but only in its full text. "Well-regulated militias" may need extreme arms, but such arms are a danger to the public in the hands of crazy people. And all of us get crazy occasionally. While we're at it, also ban military sniper rifles. These .50-caliber rifles, with armor-piercing ammunition, can penetrate an inch of armor and are deadly to 1,000 yards. Nor does any citizen need semiautomatic handguns with large-capacity magazines. It's questionable that police forces even need them.

Returning to the original meaning of the 2nd Amendment? Wouldn't that be refreshing considering that it now seems to have a meaning to the RW that it was never meant to have. I can say that without fear of contradiction because I hear conservatives say ALL the time that the second Amendment is and was meant to provide the citizens with the ability to protect themselves FROM the government? Really? That doesn't even make sense when you consider that the so-called 'well regulated Militia' is supposed to be regulated by (you guessed it) the government.

Below is the 2nd 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.
​

The purpose of the 2nd Amendment is to provide the people with the means to protect our gov't from aggression, either from foreigners or people who are attempting to overthrow our gov't. The 2nd Amendment is not meant to provide the wherewithal to overthrow the gov't.

Someone should tell that to Rep Steve Stockman (R) TX.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution#cite_note-8

 

[emptystep]

My State Constitution regulates the State Milita and sets forth the manner in which I can keep and bear arms ?

What is the definition of Militia in your state?

 

[emptystep]

'Militia' is mentioned four times in the original body of the Constitution.

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

"To provide for calling for the Militia" - by using the work 'the' refers to an existing body, 'a' Militia would be something dynamically created, i.e. from the general population.​

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

'the Army', 'the Militia'​

The second amendment applies to 'the' Militia, no one else.

 

[emptystep]

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

Is protecting one's home actually executing the Laws of the Union. Please don't try to argue that 'repel Invasions' refers to one's home.

 

[OODA_Loop]

My State Constitution regulates the State Milita and sets forth the manner in which I can keep and bear arms ?

What is the definition of Militia in your state?

SECTION 2. Militia.—
(a) The militia shall be composed of all ablebodied inhabitants of the state who are or have declared their intention to become citizens of the United States; and no person because of religious creed or opinion shall be exempted from military duty except upon conditions provided by law.

 

[OODA_Loop]

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

Is protecting one's home actually executing the Laws of the Union. Please don't try to argue that 'repel Invasions' refers to one's home.

You should read Heller v. DC. Your premise is not rooted in Constutional law.

 

[emptystep]

Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress

The U.S. Congress has to prescribe the discipline of the training of the Militia. Wow, just one more thing our Congress has failed to do. They had better get right on that.

 

[Mad Scientist]

Oh so Liberals don't think the Constitution is a "living, breathing document" anymore?

I

 

[emptystep]

My State Constitution regulates the State Milita and sets forth the manner in which I can keep and bear arms ?

What is the definition of Militia in your state?

SECTION 2. Militia.—
(a) The militia shall be composed of all ablebodied inhabitants of the state who are or have declared their intention to become citizens of the United States; and no person because of religious creed or opinion shall be exempted from military duty except upon conditions provided by law.

That makes absolutely no sense. Are one year olds part of the Militia? What about prisoners? What does it mean 'exempted from military duty'? Can a state have a 'military'?

 

[emptystep]

Oh so Liberals don't think the Constitution is a "living, breathing document" anymore?

I

 

[JakeStarkey]

The 2d Amendment in part says that the militia is to be well-regulated so that it can put down insurrections.

 

[emptystep]

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

Is protecting one's home actually executing the Laws of the Union. Please don't try to argue that 'repel Invasions' refers to one's home.

You should read Heller v. DC. Your premise is not rooted in Constutional law.

Heller v. DC modifies the Constitution. Only the Congress can do that.

 

[OODA_Loop]

What is the definition of Militia in your state?

SECTION 2. Militia.—
(a) The militia shall be composed of all able bodied inhabitants of the state who are or have declared their intention to become citizens of the United States; and no person because of religious creed or opinion shall be exempted from military duty except upon conditions provided by law.

That makes absolutely no sense. Are one year olds part of the Militia? What about prisoners? What does it mean 'exempted from military duty'? Can a state have a 'military'?

It makes perfect sense. You are just uninformed. Its okay. I don't, no one, knows everything

A one year old is not of able body for military service.

If at a point the State needs to call up prisoners, our Constitution is silent. I trust the state to determine what is militarily expedient.

The militia is the State's military.

 

[OODA_Loop]

Is protecting one's home actually executing the Laws of the Union. Please don't try to argue that 'repel Invasions' refers to one's home.

You should read Heller v. DC. Your premise is not rooted in Constutional law.

Heller v. DC modifies the Constitution. Only the Congress can do that.

Right so you're a SCOTUS authority rouge.

At that point why even discuss point of law, order and the American compact with you ?

 

[Mad Scientist]

Suddenly Liberals have respect for what a bunch of old, white slave owners wrote long ago?

Why is that?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Is protecting one's home actually executing the Laws of the Union. Please don't try to argue that 'repel Invasions' refers to one's home.

You should read Heller v. DC. Your premise is not rooted in Constutional law.

Heller v. DC modifies the Constitution. Only the Congress can do that.

Your objection is noted and overruled. Sit down.