REMINDER: Most Tea Partiers and Gun Cultists Misread 2nd Amendment

[Lakhota]

The 2nd Amendment is like a Zen riddle.

 

[Inthemiddle]

REMINDER: Most Tea Partiers and Gun Cultists Misread 2nd Amendment

Misread this.

You know, the worst part about your tired and worn out argument about the militia is that even if we accept it as valid, the second amendment would still guarantee everyone the rigth to bear arms. BECAUSE YOU AND I ARE THE MILITIA.

 

[Lakhota]

REMINDER: Most Tea Partiers and Gun Cultists Misread 2nd Amendment

Misread this.

You know, the worst part about your tired and worn out argument about the militia is that even if we accept it as valid, the second amendment would still guarantee everyone the rigth to bear arms. BECAUSE YOU AND I ARE THE MILITIA.

No, idiot, our socialist military and National Guard are the "militia"...

 

[WillowTree]

The 2nd Amendment is like a Zen riddle.

only to morons

 

[saveliberty]

Militias are citizen forces, not to be confused with government forces. I understand many are confused. Learn.

 

[mudwhistle]

REMINDER: Most Tea Partiers and Gun Cultists Misread 2nd Amendment

Misread this.

You know, the worst part about your tired and worn out argument about the militia is that even if we accept it as valid, the second amendment would still guarantee everyone the rigth to bear arms. BECAUSE YOU AND I ARE THE MILITIA.

No, idiot, our socialist military and National Guard are the "militia"...

You need to Google militia.

 

[AsheedMidrarwz]

The liberal twists the 2nd Amendment, trying to invent some hocus pocus to convince us that it doesn't really mean citizens can be armed. Remember, the goal of the left is to disarm citizens. Keep that in mind, always.

 

[Harry Dresden]

A conservative judge agrees. "In 1991, Warren E. Burger, the conservative chief justice of the Supreme Court, was interviewed on the MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour about the meaning of the Second Amendment's "right to keep and bear arms." Burger answered that the Second Amendment "has been the subject of one of the greatest pieces of fraud--I repeat the word 'fraud'--on the American public by special interest groups that I have ever seen in my lifetime." In a speech in 1992, Burger declared that "the Second Amendment doesn't guarantee the right to have firearms at all. "In his view, the purpose of the Second Amendment was "to ensure that the 'state armies'--'the militia'--would be maintained for the defense of the state." Cass R. Sunstein, “The Most Mysterious Right,” National Review http://72.52.208.92/~gbpprorg/obama/Cass_Sunstein_Quotes.pdf

See "A proposal for rational gun control." A Case for Gun Control
2nd Amendment Bearing Arms - U.S. Constitution - Findlaw
Death by the Barrel | Harvard Magazine Sep-Oct 2004
GunCite-Gun Control-International Homicide and Suicide Rates
http://www.newsminer.com/news/2009/feb/28/offering-single-shot-sentiment/?opinion

_

An opinion from a dead Judge does not trump an actual ruling by the Supreme Court. But then you already know that don't you?

Burger was a Conservative.

so?.....

 

[Katzndogz]

In order to have a population capable of forming a militia, the people must be armed. Which is why the right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed. A militia is the whole body of the citizenry who are able to fight. There's no amount of manipulation that can get around this.

 

[NYcarbineer]

In order to have a population capable of forming a militia, the people must be armed. Which is why the right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed. A militia is the whole body of the citizenry who are able to fight. There's no amount of manipulation that can get around this.

A state militia can arm its members the same way the US Army arms its members. The weapons are kept securely under lock and key in an armory or the equivalent, and members of the militia are only allowed access to them at specific times for specific purposes. That satisfies the 'gun rights' in the 2nd amendment.

A state militia can have automatic weapons, for example, but automatic weapons were otherwise banned in 1986.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

REMINDER: Most Tea Partiers and Gun Cultists Misread 2nd Amendment

LINK TO MUST READ ARTICLE EXPOSING HOW RUBES MISREAD LAW

Misreading the Right to Bear Arms

The Second Amendment reads in full: "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 popular phrasing, "the right to bear arms," is a clear signal of how political fundamentalism replaces the nuance of principles.

First, the context of gun ownership is clearly established in the right—the need for a "well regulated militia." In the eighteenth century, in the wake of the Revolution, the American mind recognized the essential, and not just symbolic, role of guns in the lives and freedom of people.

Guns were essential for food, in many circumstances, but guns were the mechanism for some degree of equality between the ruler and the ruled. During the late 1700s, then, guns and human autonomy and liberation were literally equal. The thing and the principle were blurred, and the founding documents show that fact in the carefully detailed language of the Second Amendment.

Historically, however, the U.S. has codified and embraced in the popular psyche that gun ownership itself (independent of the principles that ownership represents—"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state") is the right we must defend—and by making this transition, and ignoring the principle for the thing, twenty-first century America is a society trapped in political fundamentalism.

I happen to harbor no fear of the U.S. collapsing into a military state or police state; thus, I find the idea that each American needs to own a gun in order to form a militia if either a military or police action comes to fruition to take away our liberties to be baseless.

So people buy guns so they can form or join a militia to overthrow or oppose a government they no longer support. I don't think so. I have purchased two guns in my life, one for hunting and one for self-protection. I had no intention then and none now to join a militia and I think the vast number of people in this country feel the same way.

The real reason people buy guns is for sport and protection. If we are going to allow firearms, we should delete the crap in the 2nd amendment about forming a militia and replace it with the real reason people need to own guns. The militia clause although justified in the minds of the founders in the 1700's, is today just a ruse to justify gun ownership.

The very idea that the founding fathers would put an amendment in the constitution that offered violence as an alternative to political process to solve disputes with the government indicates that they had doubts as to whether the republic would actually work. I think those doubts today only exist in the minds of extremist.

True, per Heller the Framers intended an individual right to own a firearm in the context of self-defense, unconnected with militia service. That the Framers might have intended this to also authorize the formation of a state militia in no way justifies an inference that the people might also have the ‘right’ to overthrow a Federal government perceived to be ‘tyrannical.’

Such a notion is clearly not consistent with a republican form of government where the people are subject solely to the rule of law.

The Framers never intended for there to be mob rule at either the ballot box or by armed insurrection.

And as we see from the Heller dissenters, the militia argument goes to a collective right, undermining the individual right position.

In essence the Heller Court’s task was to determine if the Second Amendment enshrined a collective right concerning militias only, or an individual right to own a firearm for self-defense; the Court ruled it was the latter.

Those on the far right can’t have it both ways.

 

[mudwhistle]

In order to have a population capable of forming a militia, the people must be armed. Which is why the right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed. A militia is the whole body of the citizenry who are able to fight. There's no amount of manipulation that can get around this.

A state militia can arm its members the same way the US Army arms its members. The weapons are kept securely under lock and key in an armory or the equivalent, and members of the militia are only allowed access to them at specific times for specific purposes. That satisfies the 'gun rights' in the 2nd amendment.

A state militia can have automatic weapons, for example, but automatic weapons were otherwise banned in 1986.

So what's the beef? None of the weapons used at Sandy Hook were automatic.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

A conservative judge agrees. "In 1991, Warren E. Burger, the conservative chief justice of the Supreme Court, was interviewed on the MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour about the meaning of the Second Amendment's "right to keep and bear arms." Burger answered that the Second Amendment "has been the subject of one of the greatest pieces of fraud--I repeat the word 'fraud'--on the American public by special interest groups that I have ever seen in my lifetime." In a speech in 1992, Burger declared that "the Second Amendment doesn't guarantee the right to have firearms at all. "In his view, the purpose of the Second Amendment was "to ensure that the 'state armies'--'the militia'--would be maintained for the defense of the state." Cass R. Sunstein, “The Most Mysterious Right,” National Review http://72.52.208.92/~gbpprorg/obama/Cass_Sunstein_Quotes.pdf

See "A proposal for rational gun control." A Case for Gun Control
2nd Amendment Bearing Arms - U.S. Constitution - Findlaw
Death by the Barrel | Harvard Magazine Sep-Oct 2004
GunCite-Gun Control-International Homicide and Suicide Rates
http://www.newsminer.com/news/2009/feb/28/offering-single-shot-sentiment/?opinion

_

An opinion from a dead Judge does not trump an actual ruling by the Supreme Court. But then you already know that don't you?

Burger was a Conservative.

True, but not an ideologue.

It’s the bane of rightist ideologues that poses the greatest threat to our civil liberties today. We see evidence of that in this very forum daily.

 

[mudwhistle]

Our civil liberties are constantly under interpretation. The left wants to go around the constitution to get what they want. We're constantly having to take this issue to court. Two more liberal SCOTUS judges and our gun rights will be history.