What is the meaning of "militia" in the second amendment?

[9thIDdoc]

Militia=group of armed civilians

context?

Historically.

 

[robertacollier]

No IT IS NOT A REPUBLICAN COUNTRY.

Anti-republican as in a republic.

 

[robertacollier]

Oh, you're one of those nuts. I forgot.

I'm not the one cheering on "single payer" health care. If you care so much, then pull some cash from your pocket and help someone you profess to care about.

never mind

Well, come up with something instead of acting so pseudo-intellectual.

 

[Arizona Willie]

Why do you say that, Dante?

I'd like to hear your reasoning.
========

threaded sites suck

 

[Anathema]

If we did that then blacks would still be slaves and women wouldn't have the right to vote and neither would most white men. You had to be a white male PROPERTY owner, which meant owning land or a store.

Although many of us own homes on a piece of dirt the vast majority of American live in apartments owned by others and would not qualify to vote.

Other than the racial slavery issue I have no issue with any if that. I RENT a condo. If losing ny vote means the vast majority if Americans do as well, so be it.

 

[Arizona Willie]

Technically America is a:

Socialistic Representative Democratic Republic

Socialism is the root of American democracy, most American institutions are socialistic and representative because we elect people to represent us and democratic because we have votes where individuals get to vote and republic because we are a republic of states that banded together to form a larger unit ( nation ).

========

Republican with a small 'r' as in a republic

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Militia=group of armed civilians

context?

Historically.

Until when and in what context? Did the institutions of National Guard fill a militia void or role?

and historically, when was the last time a militia saved the USA from something (not counting one man's grazing on federal lands)

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Oh, you're one of those nuts. I forgot.

I'm not the one cheering on "single payer" health care. If you care so much, then pull some cash from your pocket and help someone you profess to care about.

never mind

Well, come up with something instead of acting so pseudo-intellectual.

f()ck off weirdo

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Why do you say that, Dante?

I'd like to hear your reasoning.
========

threaded sites suck

personal preferences.

I guess people like what they are used too. Like bulletin boards perhaps?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Technically America is a:

Socialistic Representative Democratic Republic

Socialism is the root of American democracy, most American institutions are socialistic and representative because we elect people to represent us and democratic because we have votes where individuals get to vote and republic because we are a republic of states that banded together to form a larger unit ( nation ).

========

Republican with a small 'r' as in a republic

Strike 'socialistic' -- attempting to be 'technical' is a big fail here on your part

You are conflating democratic with socialism

Ever hear of Democratic Socialism? Socialism is NOT the root of American democracy. If you wanted to appear schooled, you could say American democracy is open to socialistic ideals or programs

 

[Wry Catcher]

I think it was fairly straightforward for the founders.

• "I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
  — George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788

• Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American...[T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people."
  --Tenche Coxe, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.

• 
  
  
  • Whereas, to preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them; nor does it follow from this, that all promiscuously must go into actual service on every occasion. The mind that aims at a select militia, must be influenced by a truly anti-republican principle; and when we see many men disposed to practice upon it, whenever they can prevail, no wonder true republicans are for carefully guarding against it."
    --Richard Henry Lee, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.

In 1788 did we have a standing Army? Was their a National Guard? Did we have professional Soldiers and Police Officers? Were we a rural nation, for the most part?

Is every man between 18 and 45 trained under Congressional guidelines? Do the states arm, organize and discipline them (Art. I, Sec. 8, clause 16)?

None of this is really relevant to the separation of the 2nd's two clauses. The Supreme Court upheld the individual right theory over the collective in Heller and McDonald.

The administrative (as in the 1903 militia statute) does not negate the concept. You still have to look at the intent.

The intent of the 2nd seemed to be security for the nation, not for each individual. Heller was decided 5-4, Con's v. Lib's; McDonald too was decided 5-4.

Mass murder and other murders by gun don't seem to make parents of school kids feel very secure, or any of us when we see guns openly displayed in public.

 

[JakeStarkey]

"The intent of the 2nd seemed to be security for the nation" is erroneous.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

The intent of the 2nd seemed to be security for the nation, not for each individual. Heller was decided 5-4, Con's v. Lib's; McDonald too was decided 5-4.

.

But...

What of, if any, beliefs of the founding generation concerning a 'right' to bear arms? After all we know not all rights were enumerated

10th Amendment: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.​

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

"The intent of the 2nd seemed to be security for the nation" is erroneous.

and therein lies the battle

this goes over the heads of many people

 

[robertacollier]

Mass murder and other murders by gun don't seem to make parents of school kids feel very secure, or any of us when we see guns openly displayed in public.

What do feelings have to do with logic? People who openly display are obviously not criminals. Criminals hide their weapons. Your feelings are simply a queasy feeling about something with which you are unfamiliar. Have you ever shot a gun? Have you ever touched one?

Gun ownership and concealed carry have greatly increased over twenty years, while the homicide rate has greatly declined.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

What do feelings have to do with logic?

We all see people who let their feelings get in the way of logic.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Criminal minded are fully capable of open carry.

Their intent is to intimidate and frighten before hand.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Mass murder and other murders by gun don't seem to make parents of school kids feel very secure, or any of us when we see guns openly displayed in public.

What do feelings have to do with logic? People who openly display are obviously not criminals. Criminals hide their weapons. Your feelings are simply a queasy feeling about something with which you are unfamiliar. Have you ever shot a gun? Have you ever touched one?

Gun ownership and concealed carry have greatly increased over twenty years, while the homicide rate has greatly declined.

People who openly display guns are nuts, not much different than a flasher, they do so for attention.

If feelings are unimportant, than the entire abortion controversy is absurd. Logic suggests most of those aborted would be raised in homes where they were not wanted and possibly resented.

Your conclusion is not logical, correlation does not prove causation.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Criminal minded are fully capable of open carry.

Their intent is to intimidate and frighten before hand.

too many of the public figures who push open carry come off that way.

this fact complicates the arguments for those others who push open carry

then again, maybe they're all nuts with some just sounding sane and rational?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Mass murder and other murders by gun don't seem to make parents of school kids feel very secure, or any of us when we see guns openly displayed in public.

What do feelings have to do with logic? People who openly display are obviously not criminals. Criminals hide their weapons. Your feelings are simply a queasy feeling about something with which you are unfamiliar. Have you ever shot a gun? Have you ever touched one?

Gun ownership and concealed carry have greatly increased over twenty years, while the homicide rate has greatly declined.

People who openly display guns are nuts, not much different than a flasher, they do so for attention.

If feelings are unimportant, than the entire abortion controversy is absurd. Logic suggests most of those aborted would be raised in homes where they were not wanted and possibly resented.

Your conclusion is not logical, correlation does not prove causation.

Wow! Dante posted before he read this one.