US Constitution - 2nd Amendment

[AKIron]

I know this has been hashed and rehashed but can we talk about something this important too much?

To those of you that claim that the 2nd Amendment  does not guarantee law-abiding citizens the right to bear arms, what does the amendment then guarantee?

I won't put words in your mouths that I haven't already heard. The most common argument seems to be that the 2nd amendment only justifies having an armed military (active and reserve) which we have and so there is no further need for private citizen ownership. However, how would we then overthrow our government (local and/or federal) should it become unrepresentative and/or tyranical?

[Pei]

"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."

To me (a non-lawyer) that sounds pretty straight forwards: The US needs a militia so every US citizen can own arms.  It doesn't say anything about only members of the militia can bear arms or that you can bears arms only as part of a militia, just that the state requires that the people may own and keep arms so that a militia may be formed.

Of course it doesn't describe what "arms" means either. So taking it literaly a citizen should have the right to own a tank or a nuclear weapon. Wonder if Lazs can get a cheap little bulgarian knock-off of a russian nuke? .

[vorticon]

the trick with overthrowing tyranical governments is...the government has tanks machine guns and training...unless you want every citizen to possess a ak-47 and a RPG with 3000 rounds each to take out the government it just doesnt work...

[Kanth]

English, being a living language, guarentees that documents written in it will become hard to decipher for original intent and subject to interpretations.

(you will lose your rights to time, if not a direct attack)

Also, in this age of technology we should have better representation for the people's will.

I'll be interested in seeing the answer to your question in a non (this is what it DOESN'T mean) format.

[T. Jefferson]

It was pretty hot in Philadelphia and we didn't have air conditioning back then. Old Ben Franklin (he was such a kidder) thought it would be a good idea to add a little levity to the proceedings so he proposed that our right to 'bare arms' should not be infringed.

Sorry for the confusion folks.

[Otto]

The following are taken from the Oxford English Dictionary, and bracket in time the writing of the 2nd amendment:

1709: "If a liberal Education has formed in us well-regulated Appetites and worthy Inclinations."

1714: "The practice of all well-regulated courts of justice in the world."

1812: "The equation of time ... is the adjustment of the difference of time as shown by a well-regulated clock and a true sun dial."

1848: "A remissness for which I am sure every well-regulated person will blame the Mayor."

1862: "It appeared to her well-regulated mind, like a clandestine proceeding."

1894: "The newspaper, a never wanting adjunct to every well-regulated American embryo city."

The phrase "well-regulated" was in common use long before 1789, and remained so for a century thereafter. It referred to the property of something being in proper working order. Something that was well-regulated was calibrated correctly, functioning as expected. Establishing government oversight of the people's arms was not only not the intent in using the phrase in the 2nd amendment, it was precisely to render the government powerless to do so that the founders wrote it.

Sorry for the 'cut and paste' but it's important to understand what 'Well-Regulated' meant when the Constution was written. It's not what we mean today.  It's not the same as the SEC 'requlating' the stock market.  It's about something 'working' the way it is supposed to.

[lasersailor184]

When the constitution writers wrote it up, they meant that every single man was a part of the militia.  They could be called up at a moments notice if the country is in a dire situation.  It never has been though.

[Sandman]

Originally posted by AKIron

To those of you that claim that the 2nd Amendment  does not guarantee law-abiding citizens the right to bear arms, what does the amendment then guarantee?

What we think really doesn't matter.

There is not a single gun control law that has been struck down on Constitutional grounds.

Not one.

[AKIron]

Originally posted by Sandman_SBM
What we think really doesn't matter.

There is not a single gun control law that has been struck down on Constitutional grounds.

Not one.

What we think doesn't matter? That is the sort of tyranny that we must be vigilant to oppose.

[Sandman]

You're jumping to conclusions.

"WE" in this context refers to those that claim that the 2nd Amendment does not guarantee law-abiding citizens the complete and unrestricted right to bear arms.

[AKIron]

Your "we" may mean only a small minority of Americans and if their constitutional rights are violated by a tryanical government have the right, nay, the responsiblity, () to overthrow that government. Violently if necessary.

[Sandman]

To those of you that claim that the 2nd Amendment does not guarantee law-abiding citizens the right to bear arms, what does the amendment then guarantee?

Actually... it's not my "WE" at all. You started it.

But to get back to the question...

However, how would we then overthrow our government (local and/or federal) should it become unrepresentative and/or tyranical?

You're not.

You don't have the fire power.

Red Dawn was just a movie.

Your government has guns too, lots of guns, bigger guns, lots of bigger guns. Let Waco be a lesson to you. The last thing you want is the complete and undivided attention of your government.

[Bodhi]

Originally posted by AKIron
What we think doesn't matter? That is the sort of tyranny that we must be vigilant to oppose.

That very thought is what gets you branded as a militant in this country, or a member of a "evil" militia.  The time has come where by the citizens of this country no longer have a voice in what is done.  That said, this government will fall by it's own hand, and the rest of America will follow it's path to demise.  Liberalism, Multi-culturalism, and bi-lingualism will be the downfall of this nation, that which is brought forth by our government which is beyond control.

[Yeager]

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

Make what you want of it.  I own firearms and I have no intention of disowning them.  They are my benchmark to my essential and fundamental liberty.

[Yeager]

Liberalism, Multi-culturalism, and bi-lingualism will be the downfall of this nation, that which is brought forth by our government which is beyond control.
====
I have thought long and hard about this and although I cannot disagree, I am still hopeful that the downward trend can be reversed at some future point, God willing.  Or unwilling...hell, lets just have fun with it while we are here