What is Meant by "Well Regulated"?

[rightwinger]

The men at Lexington and Concord would take and feather your lying ass

Nowhere in the 27 Grievances against England in the Declaration of Independence does it mention access to firearms

 

[bigrebnc1775]

The 2nd gave the reason why the people had the right to keep and bear arms.
If that right was unfettered, the first clause would be unnecessary.

James Mason asked" who is the Militia the people are the militia.

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

You don’t 'need' an AR 15 to defend yourself – there are other firearms much better suited for that purpose, such as handguns and shotguns.

And the notion of needing an AR 15 to ‘defend against’ the government is ignorant idiocy; neither the Second Amendment nor its case law support insurrectionist dogma.

But that’s not why AR 15s shouldn’t be banned.

You and others on the right need to stop with ignorant nonsense about ‘defending yourself’ and opposing ‘government tyranny’ in opposition to AWBs and magazine capacity restrictions.

The valid and compelling reason to oppose AWBs and magazine capacity restrictions is advocacy of limited government and opposition to government excess and overreach.

Moreover, bans on assault weapons and magazine capacity restrictions should be opposed because they simply don’t work, bans rarely do – whether it’s abortion, drugs, or guns, ‘bans’ are ineffective and useless.

I need a semi-automatic rifle with a detachable magazine to insure that have equal, or superior firepower.

 

[rightwinger]

I need a semi-automatic rifle with a detachable magazine to insure that have equal, or superior firepower.

to who?

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

Wrong again. The numbers have far more impermissible zones, than permissible zones, hence they accumulate more "mass murder" free occurrences.
Making them numerically safer.

Show us how many gun zones have been attacked vs gun free zones.

The Buffalo shooter picked his target because it was a gun free zone.

 

[Billy_Bob]

I don't think that's what it means.

A well regulated militia, being necessary for a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Ok, so, what is well regulated? The Militia. For what reason? The security of a free state. What is needed? The people to have free access to firearms.

So, to me, if access to firearms is what is needed to have a well regulated militia, then it's not about government rules, it's about being properly trained, armed, and prepared. That's what "well regulated" appears to mean in this context, no?

We the People are that militia... IT is not an organization by the government. The government is however responsible for its training and access to everything needed to keep it well functioning. Our current leadership wants to deprive us of this making us ripe for subjugation, the very thing it was meant to keep us from.

 

[Billy_Bob]

to who?

TO any other standing army or idiot who wants to subjugate us.

 

[ThisIsMe]

You don’t 'need' an AR 15 to defend yourself – there are other firearms much better suited for that purpose, such as handguns and shotguns.

And the notion of needing an AR 15 to ‘defend against’ the government is ignorant idiocy; neither the Second Amendment nor its case law support insurrectionist dogma.

But that’s not why AR 15s shouldn’t be banned.

You and others on the right need to stop with ignorant nonsense about ‘defending yourself’ and opposing ‘government tyranny’ in opposition to AWBs and magazine capacity restrictions.

The valid and compelling reason to oppose AWBs and magazine capacity restrictions is advocacy of limited government and opposition to government excess and overreach.

Moreover, bans on assault weapons and magazine capacity restrictions should be opposed because they simply don’t work, bans rarely do – whether it’s abortion, drugs, or guns, ‘bans’ are ineffective and useless.

Ok, let's take defense against government off the table. Let's just say it's for self defense only.

Are you going to convince criminals to give up their guns and high capacity magazines?

What is going to happen if all the law abiding citizens give up their "assault weapons", and only carry magazines with 8 rounds? The criminals, those who, by their very nature, don't care about laws, are going to be the only ones with the kind of firepower that you want to outlaw.

Those criminals, now have the upper hand in any confrontation.


You can ban all of the weapons you want, but since there are millions of them in circulation, they will always be available.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Nowhere in the 27 Grievances against England in the Declaration of Independence does it mention access to firearms

Why were British troops going to Lexington and Concord?

 

[AZrailwhale]

You are confusing mercenaries with militia.

No I'm not.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

You are confusing mercenaries with militia.

Actually no he's not.

 

[AZrailwhale]

When was the last time a mass shooting occurred at a major sports stadium or airport?

Those are gun free zones

And both are protected by metal detectors and armed guards. In 2014 there was a mass shooting INSIDE a terminal at LAX.

 

[Failzero]

You are confusing mercenaries with militia.

Mercenaries get paid ( usually in advance)

 

[westwall]

to who?

"Enemies, foreign, and domestic"

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

One has only to read the constitution to see what the framers intended

Article II, Section 2, Clause 1: 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 . . .

Hence the right’s ‘militia’ canard, the failed, inane attempt to circumvent the Second Amendment, its case law, and necessary, proper, and Constitutional firearm regulatory measures where private citizens should have access to the same weapons as the Federal military.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The left is clueless into the real meaning of these words.

Wrong.

The ‘left’ follows settled accepted Second Amendment case law; whereas the right has nothing but contempt for that case law.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Absolutely wrong. The militas were military units organized by the colonies (states).
We the people, would not be member of the militia, as they would instead be conscripted into the army or the navy,

Correct – and controlled by their respective governments.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I don't think that's what it means.

A well regulated militia, being necessary for a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Ok, so, what is well regulated? The Militia. For what reason? The security of a free state. What is needed? The people to have free access to firearms.

So, to me, if access to firearms is what is needed to have a well regulated militia, then it's not about government rules, it's about being properly trained, armed, and prepared. That's what "well regulated" appears to mean in this context, no?

Access to firearms has nothing to do with regulation; and there’s nothing in the history, text, or case law of the Second Amendment that authorizes the notion of armed citizens ‘self-regulating’ completely absent government control and oversight.

The right of the people to keep and bear arms is to do so in the service and defense of the state, as authorized and controlled by government.

That’s why the Heller Court saw fit to contrive the individual right unconnected with militia service, because the Second Amendment recognized a collective right.

And the collective right interpretation of the Second Amendment would allow banning individuals from possessing firearms because they weren’t in the service of a militia – which is why the Heller Court invalidated the collective right interpretation.

Indeed, Heller was about the individual right versus the collective right.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I need a semi-automatic rifle with a detachable magazine to insure that have equal, or superior firepower.

No, you don’t.

You’ll never have ‘equal or superior firepower’ to the ‘government.’

And no one says you can’t have an AR 15, there’s simply no ‘need’ for one for effective self-defense.

Conservatives need to stop with this “I need an AR 15” nonsense – it’s ridiculous and in no way compelling.

AR 15s shouldn’t be banned because it’s unwarranted government excess and overreach as well as being ineffective and pointless.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Show us how many gun zones have been attacked vs gun free zones.

The Buffalo shooter picked his target because it was a gun free zone.

This is a lie.

The rightwing racist picked the store solely to murder Americans of color.