2A definition: "...well regulated Militia..."

[ataraxia]

Taken out of context, it's an incomplete sentence and means nothing.

So tell us what the context of "A well regulated militia" being at the beginning of the 2A is.

 

[Mac77]

Ok, gotcha. But I don't agree on the militia statement. The shortened version just says 'shall not be infringed', period, and as such is all-inclusive without needing to explain. All the militia statement has done is to confuse people and/or give them what they see as an "out".

Here is what the Founders said a militia was

What the Founding Fathers Meant by "Militia"

Note James Mason who is considered the father of the 2nd Amendment

To paraphrase he said the militia refers to the whole people

 

[Kal'Stang]

A seller is just interested in selling his gun. If he is not required to do a background check on his potential private customer and possibly turn him away because of what he may find, guess what? He's not going to do it.

That's not a myth.

Show me where in the law that an individual is allowed to sell a gun to anyone that is mentally disturbed or has a felony record.

Here is the law

 

[apdst]

So tell us what the context of "A well regulated militia" being at the beginning of the 2A is.

Tell us how it relates to, "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed".

 

[ataraxia]

Show me where in the law that an individual is allowed to sell a gun to anyone that is mentally disturbed or has a felony record.

Here is the law

Sure.

Gun show loophole, gun law loophole, Brady law loophole (or Brady bill loophole), private sale loophole, and private sale exemption are political terms in the United States referring to sales of firearms by private sellers, including those done at gun shows, dubbed the "secondary market".[1] The term refers to the concept that a loophole in federal law exists, under which "[a]ny person may sell a firearm to an unlicensed resident of the state where they reside, as long as they do not know or have reasonable cause to believe the person is prohibited from receiving or possessing firearms"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_show_loophole

If a seller isn't required to ask, they certainly aren't going to go out of their way to find out and turn away a good potential paying customer now, are they?

 

[ataraxia]

Tell us how it relates to, "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed".

Because that's only in the context of a "well regulated militia", the first part of the sentence. I thought you were the one interested in context.

 

[VanceMack]

Ok, gotcha. But I don't agree on the militia statement. The shortened version just says 'shall not be infringed', period, and as such is all-inclusive without needing to explain. All the militia statement has done is to confuse people and/or give them what they see as an "out".

Thats OK...I think thats allowed!

 

[Harshaw]

So tell us what the context of "A well regulated militia" being at the beginning of the 2A is.

This was already done for you:

https://www.debatepolitics.com/us-c...-well-regulated-militia-8.html#post1066995362

 

[ataraxia]

This was already done for you:

https://www.debatepolitics.com/us-c...-well-regulated-militia-8.html#post1066995362

OK. But I am not sure I understand what this has anything to do with closing the gun show loophole.

 

[Kal'Stang]

Sure.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_show_loophole

If a seller isn't required to ask, they certainly aren't going to go out of their way to find out and turn away a good potential paying customer now, are they?

So, you want two things done here.

1: Private individuals private affairs monitored.

2: For the federal government to regulate intrastate commerce which they have no power to do.

Tell me, just how are you going to get that accomplished?

In either case, there is still no loophole. No matter what Wiki says or anyone else. Legal definition of loophole Being as the federal government may not pass any laws which regulate intrastate commerce or that invade a persons right to privacy there is no loophole for the simple fact that the government has no authority to do what you want done.

 

[Harshaw]

OK. But I am not sure I understand what this has anything to do with closing the gun show loophole.

It has everything to do with your post:

So tell us what the context of "A well regulated militia" being at the beginning of the 2A is.

And there is no "gun show loophole." There is law, deliberately enacted to do exactly what it does, and to NOT do what it doesn't.

 

[Fishking]

The Second Amendment to the Constitution: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,

Here they are talking about what is necessary to defend the country from foreign powers, or even our own government, seeing as what we had just had to do and where the rebels had to get their arms. Now, where does the government get these people? Where pool are they drawing from? Just like in the Revolutionary War, the ranks were filled in by regular citizens that had their own guns. So then....

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

...that brings us back to this point of keeping that large pool of armed civilians in case we need to call on them to defend the nation from both foreign and domestic threats.

 

[Fishking]

OK. But I am not sure I understand what this has anything to do with closing the gun show loophole.

There is no gun show loophole.

 

[<alt>doxygen]

The Second Amendment to the Constitution: "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."

Please focus on only the three words on bold. No thing else, no other part. What do they mean? Is their meaning clear, or open to interpretation?

Is a militia the people in general, or is it a state-sponsored organized and approved government body? Does the fact that "Militia" is capitalized lean toward an organized government body (as a formal name, essentially), or is that irrelevant? Maybe just grammatical peculiarities of the day.

If you believe their meaning is clear, why do many people have other definitions? Are they being dishonest and/or insincere?

Thoughts?

It meant a State regulated militia, made up of the citizens of that State. You actually have to get to being necessary to the security of a free State to figure that out, though.

 

[ataraxia]

So, you want two things done here.

1: Private individuals private affairs monitored.

2: For the federal government to regulate intrastate commerce which they have no power to do.

Tell me, just how are you going to get that accomplished?

In either case, there is still no loophole. No matter what Wiki says or anyone else. Legal definition of loophole Being as the federal government may not pass any laws which regulate intrastate commerce or that invade a persons right to privacy there is no loophole for the simple fact that the government has no authority to do what you want done.

Cut the drama. If I want to sell my car, I have to report the sale, the title, etc... to the state. That seems like "private individuals private affairs monitored", and it doesn't seem like a crazy idea to me. If I am going to sell narcotics to an underage kid, that is "private individual private affairs monitored". Not sure what the problem is here. You can't just sell whatever you want to whomever you want. Never have been able to.

And if you think you can, then why the insistence that there is no gun show loophole? You are admitting that there is a loophole, but that we should have no business trying to close it.

 

[ataraxia]

There is no gun show loophole.

Sure there is.

When Zina Haughton, 42, got a restraining order against her husband, Radcliffe, last October — she told a court that his threats “terrorize my every waking moment” — he became ineligible to buy a gun under federal law. But he found a way around that: he bought a gun from a private seller he found on the Internet who, unlike federally licensed dealers, was not legally required to check his background.

That is how Mr. Haughton was able to buy a handgun for $500 in the parking lot of a McDonalds that he took with him on Oct. 21 to the spa in a suburb of Milwaukee where his wife worked. There, Mr. Haughton opened fire at the spa’s pedicure station, law enforcement officials said, and kept shooting until he had killed his wife and two women she worked with and injured four other women. He then killed himself.

Gun Law Loopholes Let Buyers Skirt Background Checks - The New York Times

When New York City sent undercover private investigators to try to buy guns from private sellers at gun shows in 2009, it reported that 19 of the 30 sellers they approached agreed to sell them guns even after they were told that the buyers “probably couldn’t pass” a background check.

Gun Law Loopholes Let Buyers Skirt Background Checks - The New York Times

 

[Kal'Stang]

Cut the drama. If I want to sell my car, I have to report the sale, the title, etc... to the state. That seems like "private individuals private affairs monitored", and it doesn't seem like a crazy idea to me. If I am going to sell narcotics to an underage kid, that is "private individual private affairs monitored". Not sure what the problem is here.

1: If there is such a law then that is a state law, not a federal one. So the federal government is not overstepping its bounds.

2: I've sold lots of cars, not once have I reported it to the state. Perhaps it varies state to state? In which case you could probably take it to court if you ever get fined and/or jailed for not reporting and win based on your right to privacy.

 

[Kal'Stang]

Sure there is.


Gun Law Loopholes Let Buyers Skirt Background Checks - The New York Times


Gun Law Loopholes Let Buyers Skirt Background Checks - The New York Times

Only examples that you gave are people breaking the law. Try again.

 

[ataraxia]

1: If there is such a law then that is a state law, not a federal one. So the federal government is not overstepping its bounds.

2: I've sold lots of cars, not once have I reported it to the state. Perhaps it varies state to state? In which case you could probably take it to court if you ever get fined and/or jailed for not reporting and win based on your right to privacy.

You don't pay property taxes on your cars in your state? If you sell your car, do you keep paying taxes on it? How would they know you no longer have it?

 

[ataraxia]

Only examples that you gave are people breaking the law. Try again.

So we wait until the crazy person buys the gun, does something crazy, then we catch him?

So then why don't we just let drunk drivers drive around freely, and arrest them only after they have killed a couple of people? Because, after all, any examples I could give of trying to keep drunks from driving would be after they have already broken the law, right?

 

[Kal'Stang]

So we wait until the crazy person buys the gun, does something crazy, then we catch him?

So then why don't we just let drunk drivers drive around freely, and arrest them only after they have killed a couple of people? Because, after all, any examples I could give of trying to keep drunks from driving would be after they have already broken the law, right?

That IS how our system works. We do not convict people and take away their Rights based on something that they haven't done.

 

[ataraxia]

That IS how our system works. We do not convict people and take away their Rights based on something that they haven't done.

So just to be clear: you don't think we should be arresting drunk drivers either? At least not until they have killed a few?

 

[Kal'Stang]

You don't pay property taxes on your cars in your state? If you sell your car, do you keep paying taxes on it? How would they know you no longer have it?

Nope. Only tax I pay is when I first buy a car in the form of a sales tax. Property taxes are taxes paid on actual land/houses. No such thing as a recurring property tax for things like cars.

What state do you live in? I want to know so that I never move there if they have something like you ask about here....

 

[Fishking]

Sure there is.

Gun Law Loopholes Let Buyers Skirt Background Checks - The New York Times

Gun Law Loopholes Let Buyers Skirt Background Checks - The New York Times

Yeah...that's not a gun show loophole. There is no gun show loophole. There is the ability for a private citizen to sell their private weapons to another party without certain regulations applying because they are not doing it as a business and it's their property. Everyone who is an actual gun dealer has to follow all regulations, even if they are at a gun show.

 

[Fishking]

Cut the drama. If I want to sell my car, I have to report the sale, the title, etc... to the state.

No you don't. You get a signature notarized and such but it is on the buyer to register the title with the state when they go to get their license plate.