Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Gun Control & RKBA
In reply to the discussion: Md Gun law found unconstitutional [View all]AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)107. I'm not sure if we're speaking the same language, or if you are being intentionally obtuse.
"You say it was "aimed" at individuals and other groups, but it actually says that those individuals and groups are NOT authorized to form a body of armed men (a militia). Like I said, this leads me to believe that it is a state militia provision which allows for self defence."
Please re-read my statement, and the amendment. If you cannot identify what I said in plain english, we're pretty much done here. (hint, your objection is basically what I said)
"Why do you say "be armed" and not "keep arms?" "
Because it is a distinction without a difference.
"Hang on, you can't post a state provision, that was enacted over a century later, which refers to each individual citizen defending himself and apply the same meaning to the Second Amendment."
There is a clear line of evolution in the 38 or so odd states that explicitly protect the right to keep and bear arms in their constitutions, that leads to this meaning. This is also a tenth amendment issue, as the 2nd only says what the Federal Government may not do, not what the people may do.
"You mean that the militia consists of individuals, therefore individuals must be allowed to own guns. But militiamen had a DUTY to serve AND to provide a musket for his militia service. A "right" for a militiaman to own a gun wasn't necessary to arm the militia. I mean, the AoC declares that every state will keep a sufficient quantity of arms and ammo' in public stores. So, the militia can be armed without a personal right to own a gun."
That didn't work too good for us last time. Query: in any recent legitimate example of the function of a citizens' militia in use in the united states, did the people have time to check out weapons from an armory? (LA Riots, about 70 Korean store owners formed an ad-hoc militia to defend several square blocks of storefronts, arguably in the interest of the security of a free state).
Regardless of whether the state COULD supply arms to the people in time of need, both the federal and state constitutions that apply where I live specify quite clearly, that the PEOPLE shall keep them. That doesn't mean an armory to me.
Please re-read my statement, and the amendment. If you cannot identify what I said in plain english, we're pretty much done here. (hint, your objection is basically what I said)
"Why do you say "be armed" and not "keep arms?" "
Because it is a distinction without a difference.
"Hang on, you can't post a state provision, that was enacted over a century later, which refers to each individual citizen defending himself and apply the same meaning to the Second Amendment."
There is a clear line of evolution in the 38 or so odd states that explicitly protect the right to keep and bear arms in their constitutions, that leads to this meaning. This is also a tenth amendment issue, as the 2nd only says what the Federal Government may not do, not what the people may do.
"You mean that the militia consists of individuals, therefore individuals must be allowed to own guns. But militiamen had a DUTY to serve AND to provide a musket for his militia service. A "right" for a militiaman to own a gun wasn't necessary to arm the militia. I mean, the AoC declares that every state will keep a sufficient quantity of arms and ammo' in public stores. So, the militia can be armed without a personal right to own a gun."
That didn't work too good for us last time. Query: in any recent legitimate example of the function of a citizens' militia in use in the united states, did the people have time to check out weapons from an armory? (LA Riots, about 70 Korean store owners formed an ad-hoc militia to defend several square blocks of storefronts, arguably in the interest of the security of a free state).
Regardless of whether the state COULD supply arms to the people in time of need, both the federal and state constitutions that apply where I live specify quite clearly, that the PEOPLE shall keep them. That doesn't mean an armory to me.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
110 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Cite the historical records, writtings of the authors of the Constitution and Amendments...
PavePusher
Mar 2012
#38
re: "...when "the people" are bearing arms, they're maintaining a militia."
discntnt_irny_srcsm
Mar 2012
#58
Regardless of your blatant misinterpretation, MY state has no such clause to misinterpret.
AtheistCrusader
Mar 2012
#94
The second half was aimed, quite obviously, at individuals and corporations building
AtheistCrusader
Mar 2012
#96
I'm not sure if we're speaking the same language, or if you are being intentionally obtuse.
AtheistCrusader
Mar 2012
#107
That's because all it takes is one example to demonstrate the hole in your arguement.
Atypical Liberal
Mar 2012
#21
I'm not going to slog through this. I reject the entire premise of "collective rights".
Atypical Liberal
Mar 2012
#49
There is nothing that the people as a whole can do that a single person cannot do.
Atypical Liberal
Mar 2012
#54
You're almost there. What ACTIONS do individuals have the RIGHT to do.
Atypical Liberal
Mar 2012
#81
Nope, still no actions listed that the public can undertake that individuals cannot.
Atypical Liberal
Mar 2012
#88
I made the mistake of checking in latest threads instead of the forum - lesson learned. Sorry again
kelly1mm
Mar 2012
#9
"Rationing" can also be used to describe meting something out by perceived need.
TheWraith
Mar 2012
#13