What Do The Words "A Well Regulated Militia" Mean?

[Kondor3]

And why do RWers and other Republicans like to ignore it?

Democrats loose votes every time they talk about gun control.....that's why you don't hear them talk much about it.

Hell, the way things have been going for them the past couple of years, Democrats can lose votes by just getting out of bed in the morning...

 

[Wry Catcher]

If the intent of the Second Amendment had nothing to do with the militia, wouldn't the bold section have been cut out entirely?

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.

Why do you refuse to accept that your interpretation of the 2nd is wrong?

1. I can read;
2. I asked a question, why is that wrong?
3. Art. 1, Sec 8 isn't vague or ambiguous.
4. The proliferation of guns is a serious social problem.
5. Too many innocents have died.

and, if the signers believed every person had the absolute right to own, possess or have in their custody or control, the 2nd would have been explciite and simply stated, "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

 

[jillian]

If the intent of the Second Amendment had nothing to do with the militia, wouldn't the bold section have been cut out entirely?

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.

Why do you refuse to accept that your interpretation of the 2nd is wrong?

because it isn't.

and from the time the constitution was ratified until scalia and his friends got their little paws on it, justices and legal scholars laughed at the idea that the constitution conferred a private right of gun ownership.

and then came scalia...

 

[Geaux4it]

And why do RWers and other Republicans like to ignore it?

They don't like regulations.

For one, we don't like government overreach

-Geaux

 

[Geaux4it]

If the intent of the Second Amendment had nothing to do with the militia, wouldn't the bold section have been cut out entirely?

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.

Why do you refuse to accept that your interpretation of the 2nd is wrong?

1. I can read
2. I asked a question, why is that wrong
3. Art. 1, Sec 8 isn't vague or ambiguous.
4. The proliferation of guns is a serious social problem.
5. Too many innocents have died.

and, if the signers believed every person had the absolute right to own, possess or have in their custody or control, the 2nd would have been explciite and simply stated, "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

1. I can read;
Yea, through Rose colored glasses under the hammer of oppression
2. I asked a question, why is that wrong?
Because you don't accept others answers
3. Art. 1, Sec 8 isn't vague or ambiguous.
Sure it is
4. The proliferation of guns is a serious social problem.
No it's not. The social problem is parenting today or lack thereof
5. Too many innocents have died.
Acceptable risk to live in this country. Don't want to accept that risk? Here's the door.

-Geaux

 

[Kondor3]

If the intent of the Second Amendment had nothing to do with the militia, wouldn't the bold section have been cut out entirely?

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.

Why do you refuse to accept that your interpretation of the 2nd is wrong?

because it isn't.

and from the time the constitution was ratified until scalia and his friends got their little paws on it, justices and legal scholars laughed at the idea that the constitution conferred a private right of gun ownership.

and then came scalia...

That is because the private right to own and carry firearms was simply and implicitly assumed for the first couple of centuries of our national existence, with the States handling the particulars.

It is only in recent times that attempted Gun-Grabber assaults on the Second, and Gun Owners, have required explicit rulings that the Second does, indeed, include implicit empowerment of the citizenry to own and carry firearms, in a private self-defense context.

A quick review of major cases, in the obligatory Wiki article, may be of some service...

Firearm case law in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[rightwinger]

actually its liberals who keep reenforcing some of you are less equal than others. and because you are less equal we will legislate things like affirmative action to get you jobs we don't believe you can get on your own. We will keep you flush in entitlements since you remain uneducated and obviously can't make it on your own. We will support you being low information voters, as long as you keep voting for us

Affirmative action was a major success. Nearly every American benefitted in some way from the program

yea, got yo love all those unqualified individuals filling civil service jobs today. i saw a great one today. I was walking to a meeting in another building today. i see two guys beating the shit out of each other in front of a restaurant. an obviously qualified affrimative action cop is standing on the corner texting. didn't even notice or care about what was going on. another good one. a month ago some affirmative acton traffic cop stops traffic heading east west to let an abbulance go through. while the ambulance is going through the light changes. pedesrians are now crossing the street with the walk light. dumbass with out looking waves east west traffic back on. car heading east hits a pedestrian, car behing care heading east hits him in the ass as he stops. chalk a few up for affirmative action.

I remember in the late 60s and early 70s, girls in High School would post their future ambitions in the year book. Most would say wife, nurse, teacher, secretary or beautician. The idea that a woman could be a manager, accountant, join the military or be a doctor or a lawyer was beyond them

We can thank affirmative action for opening those opportunities

 

[M14 Shooter]

If the intent of the Second Amendment had nothing to do with the militia, wouldn't the bold section have been cut out entirely?

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.

Why do you refuse to accept that your interpretation of the 2nd is wrong?

because it isn't.

Really?
When did the SCotUS hold anything other than what it laid down in Heller? What SCotUS decision did Heller overturn?
Please be sure to cite the cases, the text from same, and the text from Heller that overturns it.

Run along now - you have urinals to scrub.

 

[M14 Shooter]

If the intent of the Second Amendment had nothing to do with the militia, wouldn't the bold section have been cut out entirely?

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.

Why do you refuse to accept that your interpretation of the 2nd is wrong?

1. I can read;

Really? Try reading this:
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. HELLER
Then tell me why you continue to refuse to accept that your interpretation is wrong.

 

[Misty]

And why do RWers and other Republicans like to ignore it?

Maybe because you left out this;

"the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

 

[jasonnfree]

Affirmative action was a major success. Nearly every American benefitted in some way from the program

yea, got yo love all those unqualified individuals filling civil service jobs today. i saw a great one today. I was walking to a meeting in another building today. i see two guys beating the shit out of each other in front of a restaurant. an obviously qualified affrimative action cop is standing on the corner texting. didn't even notice or care about what was going on. another good one. a month ago some affirmative acton traffic cop stops traffic heading east west to let an abbulance go through. while the ambulance is going through the light changes. pedesrians are now crossing the street with the walk light. dumbass with out looking waves east west traffic back on. car heading east hits a pedestrian, car behing care heading east hits him in the ass as he stops. chalk a few up for affirmative action.

I remember in the late 60s and early 70s, girls in High School would post their future ambitions in the year book. Most would say wife, nurse, teacher, secretary or beautician. The idea that a woman could be a manager, accountant, join the military or be a doctor or a lawyer was beyond them

We can thank affirmative action for opening those opportunities

I remember traffic court in the early 60's. I went before a woman judge. So unusual, same as women doctors, almost never saw one. Most of the smart women were teachers or nurses. Thanks to affirmative action that's changed, although still nothing wrong with teaching or nursing except the republicans would like nurses, and especially teachers, to make much less money with no benefits or job protection.

 

[jasonnfree]

actually its liberals who keep reenforcing some of you are less equal than others. and because you are less equal we will legislate things like affirmative action to get you jobs we don't believe you can get on your own. We will keep you flush in entitlements since you remain uneducated and obviously can't make it on your own. We will support you being low information voters, as long as you keep voting for us

Affirmative action was a major success. Nearly every American benefitted in some way from the program

yea, got yo love all those unqualified individuals filling civil service jobs today. i saw a great one today. I was walking to a meeting in another building today. i see two guys beating the shit out of each other in front of a restaurant. an obviously qualified affrimative action cop is standing on the corner texting. didn't even notice or care about what was going on. another good one. a month ago some affirmative acton traffic cop stops traffic heading east west to let an abbulance go through. while the ambulance is going through the light changes. pedesrians are now crossing the street with the walk light. dumbass with out looking waves east west traffic back on. car heading east hits a pedestrian, car behing care heading east hits him in the ass as he stops. chalk a few up for affirmative action.

Obviously affirmative action. How could you tell?

 

[M14 Shooter]

And why do RWers and other Republicans like to ignore it?

Maybe because you left out this;

"the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

It is impossible for the anti-gun loons to construct a sound argument in support of their idea that the "well regulate militia" clause somehow places a limit on what "right of the people" is protected; to do so they have to show that the people what wrote debated and ratified the 2nd held that the right so protected was related wholly to service in the militia, to the full exclusion of any other possible application.

That is, they have to show that those people intended for you to have the right to keep and bear arms for the protection of the state, but not your home, family or person.

They know they cannot do this, and so will not even try.

 

[Wry Catcher]

And why do RWers and other Republicans like to ignore it?

Maybe because you left out this;

"the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

It is impossible for the anti-gun loons to construct a sound argument in support of their idea that the "well regulate militia" clause somehow places a limit on what "right of the people" is protected; to do so they have to show that the people what wrote debated and ratified the 2nd held that the right so protected was related wholly to service in the militia, to the full exclusion of any other possible application.

That is, they have to show that those people intended for you to have the right to keep and bear arms for the protection of the state, but not your home, family or person.

They know they cannot do this, and so will not even try.

Red Herring alert ^^^ + a very wet staw man.

Here's an interesting article from the Washington Post:

Five myths about gun control - The Washington Post

 

[M14 Shooter]

Maybe because you left out this;

"the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

It is impossible for the anti-gun loons to construct a sound argument in support of their idea that the "well regulate militia" clause somehow places a limit on what "right of the people" is protected; to do so they have to show that the people what wrote debated and ratified the 2nd held that the right so protected was related wholly to service in the militia, to the full exclusion of any other possible application.

That is, they have to show that those people intended for you to have the right to keep and bear arms for the protection of the state, but not your home, family or person.

They know they cannot do this, and so will not even try.

Red Herring alert ^^^ + a very wet staw man.

As I said -- you won't even try.

 

[Antares]

They mean that no matter how much Marc cries otherwise we get to keep our guns.

Carry on.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Here's an interesting article from the Washington Post:

Five myths about gun control - The Washington Post

3. America’s schools have become shooting galleries.
So then... why do the anti-gun loons break out the pitchforks and torches after every school shooting?
Simple: they can only argue from emotion, ignorance and/or dishonesty.

4. Gun regulations are incompatible with America’s gun heritage.
Gun regulations that infringe on the right of the people to keep and bear arms, however, are incompatible with the constitution.

5. The Second Amendment was intended to protect the right of Americans to rise up against a tyrannical government.
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.

 

[Antares]

If the intent of the Second Amendment had nothing to do with the militia, wouldn't the bold section have been cut out entirely?

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.

Why do you refuse to accept that your interpretation of the 2nd is wrong?

because it isn't.

and from the time the constitution was ratified until scalia and his friends got their little paws on it, justices and legal scholars laughed at the idea that the constitution conferred a private right of gun ownership.

and then came scalia...

....and yet in ALL of that time nobody took them away from us...huh.

 

[westwall]

Maybe because you left out this;

"the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

It is impossible for the anti-gun loons to construct a sound argument in support of their idea that the "well regulate militia" clause somehow places a limit on what "right of the people" is protected; to do so they have to show that the people what wrote debated and ratified the 2nd held that the right so protected was related wholly to service in the militia, to the full exclusion of any other possible application.

That is, they have to show that those people intended for you to have the right to keep and bear arms for the protection of the state, but not your home, family or person.

They know they cannot do this, and so will not even try.

Red Herring alert ^^^ + a very wet staw man.

Here's an interesting article from the Washington Post:

Five myths about gun control - The Washington Post

Did you read it? I did. Here is one of the myths......

3. America’s schools have become shooting galleries.

From Columbine to Sandy Hook, few crimes are more heinous than the killing of children. But schools are remarkably safe for kids — safer than their homes or the streets. Out of a school-age population of roughly 50 million, the number of violent school deaths between 1992 and 2010 did not exceed 63 per year, according to the National Center for Education Statistics. In other words, the odds of a child dying from a violent attack at school are about one in a million.


Debunking one of YOUR major talking points.......

 

[Wry Catcher]

Here's an interesting article from the Washington Post:

Five myths about gun control - The Washington Post

3. America’s schools have become shooting galleries.
So then... why do the anti-gun loons break out the pitchforks and torches after every school shooting?
Simple: they can only argue from emotion, ignorance and/or dishonesty.

4. Gun regulations are incompatible with America’s gun heritage.
Gun regulations that infringe on the right of the people to keep and bear arms, however, are incompatible with the constitution.

5. The Second Amendment was intended to protect the right of Americans to rise up against a tyrannical government.
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.

Cherry picking is dishonest.