Latest Breaking News

Warren Stupidity

(48,181 posts)

11. Which gets straight to the heart of the matter.

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 11:36 AM

Jan 2013

A literal interpretation of the 2a would apply only to those weapons required to equip a militia. That would be full auto assault weapons, surface to air missiles, RPGs, anti tank weapons, mortars, light machine guns, grenades and other standard infantry weaponry.

Not covered would be hunting rifles, handguns, and standard shotguns.

The literal interpretation is lunacy in a modern society. So we are left with re-interpreting the 2a as a limited right to keep and bear some weapons, the issue is which weapons, and under what regulations one may keep and bear them.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

68 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Gun Owners Of America Chief: Scalia Wrong On Second Amendment [View all] DonViejo Jan 2013 OP

Well, Mr. Pratt ... if you're going to get technical about how the constitution is written ... zbdent Jan 2013 #1

'Regulated' was always a part of the second amendment duhneece Jan 2013 #5

Regardless, 'regulated' applies to the militia, not the arms. appal_jack Jan 2013 #21

HYPOCRITES B-ONE Lancer Jan 2013 #30

Switch to sub light engines rrneck Jan 2013 #47

There's not much utility in posting something ... surrealAmerican Jan 2013 #48

Dear god... raidert05 Jan 2013 #53

please stop shouting, it hurts my eyes and hurts your points klyon Jan 2013 #57

Much of the discussion, now, IS about duhneece Jan 2013 #40

If you care about speech rights, this might interest you: JDPriestly Jan 2013 #60

Thanks JDP. Indeed important. appal_jack Jan 2013 #64

And I do, and it did...interest me. duhneece Jan 2013 #65

All actual or potential militia members must be liscenced. TheMadMonk Jan 2013 #62

I looked up that question the other day. To them, a "well-regulated" militia means bloomington-lib Jan 2013 #6

That's the way a lot of writers in the late 1700s used the term. Igel Jan 2013 #25

In order to be "well regulated", militias need to have people who have guns.Who are militias? humblebum Jan 2013 #50

Any Society Can Decide That It Will No Longer Support And Allow Gun Ownership cantbeserious Jan 2013 #2

Just in this society it will require a constitutional amendment.. pipoman Jan 2013 #7

Defeatism Is Not An Endearing Quality cantbeserious Jan 2013 #10

Nor is unrealistic expectations.. pipoman Jan 2013 #43

Societies Change - DUI Laws - Smoking Laws - Civil Rights Laws - Etc., Etc. ... cantbeserious Jan 2013 #44

I'm not saying it can't change, pipoman Jan 2013 #49

This Is Not About Obama, This Is About Us And The Society We Live In cantbeserious Jan 2013 #63

It will be about Obama pipoman Jan 2013 #66

More & more, I'm getting closer to supporting repealing the second amendment duhneece Jan 2013 #39

true, since we now have a large standing army it has little purpose or meaning klyon Jan 2013 #58

A government that maintains a large standing army was one of the reasons for having the humblebum Jan 2013 #61

What's Pratt's position on the right to keep and wear explosive underwear on planes? nt Xipe Totec Jan 2013 #3

When you're to the right on Scalia you know you're wacky SWTORFanatic Jan 2013 #4

Whoa! brush Jan 2013 #8

That's what I took from this. kag Jan 2013 #37

There are very few people right of Scalia. aandegoons Jan 2013 #9

Which gets straight to the heart of the matter. Warren Stupidity Jan 2013 #11

Wow pipoman Jan 2013 #51

The GOA Is The Group For Those Who Think The NRA Is Too Liberal. Really. Paladin Jan 2013 #12

I wonder about that, too primavera Jan 2013 #16

Nicely Put. (nt) Paladin Jan 2013 #19

We're relying on words written over 220 years ago groundloop Jan 2013 #13

Why have a single intent? Igel Jan 2013 #29

The National Guard is the "well regulated Militia." formercia Jan 2013 #14

The National Guard did not exist in the 1700s. former9thward Jan 2013 #35

I'm talking about Today. formercia Jan 2013 #41

Mr. Pratt, if the 2nd Amendment is there to constrain the government, A Simple Game Jan 2013 #15

The Constitution REQUIRES regulation. bowens43 Jan 2013 #17

Pratt Didn't Have To Concern Himself With A "Well Regulated Militia".... Paladin Jan 2013 #20

Actually, it is paradoxical ... brett_jv Jan 2013 #23

So Shoot Me. Paladin Jan 2013 #24

Your shouting won't help your position. former9thward Jan 2013 #36

"Scalia wrong"....gee, what ARE the odds? BlueNoteSpecial Jan 2013 #18

Okay, Fine, Larry ... lets' just remove ALL regulations on gun ownership then ... brett_jv Jan 2013 #22

GOA makes NRA look sane. They are the fringe's fringe. The Velveteen Ocelot Jan 2013 #26

how crazy r u when scalia, the likely enabler of an samsingh Jan 2013 #27

I give up. Now they've got ME thinking about secession. patrice Jan 2013 #28

The 2nd Amendment says "a WELL-REGULATED MILITIA" not a free-for-all for nincompoops judesedit Jan 2013 #31

Another colossal error in the thinking of these types is that the "gov't" is separate from the okaawhatever Jan 2013 #32

The Constitution pipoman Jan 2013 #56

Unless of course we have a "War on Terror" Bandit Jan 2013 #67

It surprises me how many wish for such a thing.. pipoman Jan 2013 #68

If what the 2nd Amendment meant when it was written kiranon Jan 2013 #33

Sure, and it also says 'A well-regulated militia elleng Jan 2013 #34

Hey! We only read the parts that we like. Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #55

you know the 2nd amendment isnt' the only place "militias" are mentioned booley Jan 2013 #38

What amuses me about Fat Tony the Originalist truebluegreen Jan 2013 #42

This is wryly hilarious, in a sick sort of way. nt MADem Jan 2013 #45

Scalia said that? leanforward Jan 2013 #46

The NRA says the 2nd means A well armed Zimmerman on every street corner graham4anything Jan 2013 #52

Damned activist leftist Supreme Court. What's that? Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #54

I will believe that gun owners really care about freedom and the Second Amendment and civil JDPriestly Jan 2013 #59