What "well regulated" means in the 2nd Amendment

[swing_voter]

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.



Every state had it's own militia back then. It's one of the reasons our Civil War was so bad, every state had an army.

"A well regulated Militia" is obvious. States are allowed their militias, the fed gets to regulate them.

" the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Most legal scholars say the people in this case are militia members.

The states wanted the second amendment because they didn't want the fed to take their militias away. The second amendment guarantees the right of the states to have militias.

 

[AlphaOmega]

Shooting range? You won't catch me near one. Can't stand them. If I want to sight my rifle I put a target on the back of my woodshed and I sure as hell won't pour money through the barrel because I like the noise it makes.
Guns are tools or they're toys. I know how to aim, I don't need to practice, I just want to be sure it'll shoot to where I point it.

As for personal attacks, yeah, I did. But I'm a liberal, and when you say liberals this or liberals that you're attacking me. I'll have to be more careful about delicate feelings and snowflakes around here in the future, I guess.

You shoot your firearm at your shed?

 

[Grand Mal]

You shoot your firearm at your shed?

Both of them, once or twice a year. A lever action Marlin and a single shot .22. When I say woodshed I'm talking about 5 cords undercover and a couple more beside it. Takes a bunch of firewood to heat 2100 square feet through a winter.
Oh, I get it- you're a metro type. Well, my firearms are tools. I hunt, I kill pigs, I shoot raccoons, I shoot to scare the ravens out of my cherry trees because I don't like to kill them and .22 long is still cheap.
Actually, I don't think I'm a hunter anymore.
Tools or toys. Tools or toys.

 

[Glitch]

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.



Every state had it's own militia back then. It's one of the reasons our Civil War was so bad, every state had an army.

"A well regulated Militia" is obvious. States are allowed their militias, the fed gets to regulate them.

" the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Most legal scholars say the people in this case are militia members.

The states wanted the second amendment because they didn't want the fed to take their militias away. The second amendment guarantees the right of the states to have militias.

Incorrect in two areas.

First, the States have their own militias today. All 50 States have laws on the books concerning their militias, even though only there are only 21 States with active militias.

Second, the Second Amendment was created to guarantee the ancient individual right to keep and bear arms. The individual right to keep and bear arms is independent of membership in a militia.

 

[TurtleDude]

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.



Every state had it's own militia back then. It's one of the reasons our Civil War was so bad, every state had an army.

"A well regulated Militia" is obvious. States are allowed their militias, the fed gets to regulate them.

" the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Most legal scholars say the people in this case are militia members.

The states wanted the second amendment because they didn't want the fed to take their militias away. The second amendment guarantees the right of the states to have militias.

complete lie

 

[AlphaOmega]

Both of them, once or twice a year. A lever action Marlin and a single shot .22. When I say woodshed I'm talking about 5 cords undercover and a couple more beside it. Takes a bunch of firewood to heat 2100 square feet through a winter.
Oh, I get it- you're a metro type. Well, my firearms are tools. I hunt, I kill pigs, I shoot raccoons, I shoot to scare the ravens out of my cherry trees because I don't like to kill them and .22 long is still cheap.
Actually, I don't think I'm a hunter anymore.
Tools or toys. Tools or toys.

No I was wondering why a dude would shoot holes through his shed but that makes a bit more sense.

 

[danielpalos]

Incorrect in two areas.

First, the States have their own militias today. All 50 States have laws on the books concerning their militias, even though only there are only 21 States with active militias.

Second, the Second Amendment was created to guarantee the ancient individual right to keep and bear arms. The individual right to keep and bear arms is independent of membership in a militia.

Our Second Amendment is clearly about the security of our free States not Individual rights. It says so in the first clause.

 

[Glitch]

Our Second Amendment is clearly about the security of our free States not Individual rights. It says so in the first clause.

No, it doesn't. I suggest you take a course in reading comprehension. The phrase "the right of the people" refers to individual rights. It is the exact same phrase in the First and Fourth Amendments, and they are both individual rights. Either you do not know the meaning of the word, or you are deliberately dishonest. Considering you are a self-proclaimed "liberal" it is pretty obvious that it is the latter.

 

[danielpalos]

No, it doesn't. I suggest you take a course in reading comprehension. The phrase "the right of the people" refers to individual rights. It is the exact same phrase in the First and Fourth Amendments, and they are both individual rights. Either you do not know the meaning of the word, or you are deliberately dishonest. Considering you are a self-proclaimed "liberal" it is pretty obvious that it is the latter.

I have no idea where you get your right wing propaganda and rhetoric from. I am on the left, i prefer valid arguments to appeals to ignorance and the bigotry of claiming I am right, simply because I am on the right wing.

the first clause comes First, not Second, for a reason and cannot be ignored since there is no appeal to ignorance of the law.

 

[Glitch]

I have no idea where you get your right wing propaganda and rhetoric from. I am on the left, i prefer valid arguments to appeals to ignorance and the bigotry of claiming I am right, simply because I am on the right wing.

the first clause comes First, not Second, for a reason and cannot be ignored since there is no appeal to ignorance of the law.

I know you are on the left, bigotry and ignorance is all you have. I have the US Constitution, the Supreme Court, and 231 years of American history on my side. You don't have diddly-squat to support any of your anti-American nonsense.

 

[VanceMack]

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.



Every state had it's own militia back then. It's one of the reasons our Civil War was so bad, every state had an army.

"A well regulated Militia" is obvious. States are allowed their militias, the fed gets to regulate them.

" the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Most legal scholars say the people in this case are militia members.

The states wanted the second amendment because they didn't want the fed to take their militias away. The second amendment guarantees the right of the states to have militias.

You mean most gun control activists. Because anyone that is a 'scholar' that says the Bill of Rights was written to defend the rights of a government entity or an organization, may be an education person...but they expose themselves as little more than a hack, and not a scholar.

 

[danielpalos]

I know you are on the left, bigotry and ignorance is all you have. I have the US Constitution, the Supreme Court, and 231 years of American history on my side. You don't have diddly-squat to support any of your anti-American nonsense.

lol. I gainsay your contention; want to argue about it?

 

[Jay59]

It has been said that if the 2nd amendment was was enforced like the 4th, everyone would be required to own and demonstrate proficiency with a gun. The phrase well ordered militia is a big part of that. The background of the language in the amendment indicates a belief that the people should be armed well enough to overthrow the government.

An argument can also be made for mandatory service, such as in Germany. However, there is no history for that reading.

 

[vegas giants]

It has been said that if the 2nd amendment was was enforced like the 4th, everyone would be required to own and demonstrate proficiency with a gun. The phrase well ordered militia is a big part of that. The background of the language in the amendment indicates a belief that the people should be armed well enough to overthrow the government.

An argument can also be made for mandatory service, such as in Germany. However, there is no history for that reading.

And mandatory training.

 

[Rich2018]

It has been said that if the 2nd amendment was was enforced like the 4th, everyone would be required to own and demonstrate proficiency with a gun....

An argument can also be made for mandatory service, such as in Germany...

I'm not saying it hasn't but I'm not aware of that - what it the source ?

Actually I believe in Germany, a young man can opt for public service like working as a porter in a hospital.

 

[danielpalos]

It has been said that if the 2nd amendment was was enforced like the 4th, everyone would be required to own and demonstrate proficiency with a gun. The phrase well ordered militia is a big part of that. The background of the language in the amendment indicates a belief that the people should be armed well enough to overthrow the government.

An argument can also be made for mandatory service, such as in Germany. However, there is no history for that reading.

That a well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state, therefore, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty; and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.

 

[Rich2018]

That a well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state, therefore, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty; and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.

You never did say how a "well regulated" militia could successfully prosecute the war on drugs or the war on crime.

So once an armed militia has assempled and set up its base....what possible actions could it take in your mind ?

 

[danielpalos]

You never did say how a "well regulated" militia could successfully prosecute the war on drugs or the war on crime.

So once an armed militia has assempled and set up its base....what possible actions could it take in your mind ?

All those persons are no longer "on the street causing trouble".

 

[Noodlegawd]

The second amendment guarantees the right of the states to have militias.

If that were all it was meant to do, it would just say: "The right of the states to have militias shall not be infringed."

 

[danielpalos]

If that were all it was meant to do, it would just say: "The right of the states to have militias shall not be infringed."

States have a right to their own security.

 

[Rich2018]

All those persons are no longer "on the street causing trouble".

That's a goal not a means.

What actions would you envision an armed militia taking, after they assembled, to bring about your preferred state of affairs ?

Specifically how would an armed militia get all those "persons" off the street ?

 

[danielpalos]

That's a goal not a means.

What actions would you envision an armed militia taking, after they assembled, to bring about your preferred state of affairs ?

Specifically how would an armed militia get all those "persons" off the street ?

Simply mustering a bunch of gun lovers means less criminal behavior.

 

[Rich2018]

Simply mustering a bunch of gun lovers means less criminal behavior.

How ?

How does an mustered, armed militia (or as you put it a "bunch of gun lovers) reduce criminal behavior ?

Specifically what actions could/would an armed militia (or "bunch of gun lovers") take to get all those "persons off the street" ?

 

[danielpalos]

How ?

How does an mustered, armed militia (or as you put it a "bunch of gun lovers) reduce criminal behavior ?

Specifically what actions could/would an armed militia (or "bunch of gun lovers") take to get all those "persons off the street" ?

They will be mustering not causing problems. See how simple it is.

 

[Rich2018]

They will be mustering not causing problems. See how simple it is.

How does mustering an armed militia (or as you put it a "bunch of gun lovers) reduce criminal behavior ?

Specifically what steps could/would a mustered, armed militia take to get "persons off the street" ?