You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Reply #89: The statement is not incorrect. [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU
Joe Steel Donating Member (337 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-28-09 12:20 PM
Response to Reply #61
89. The statement is not incorrect.
That may be so, but the 2nd speaks nothing about it.

"The Second Amendment protects the right of the People, collectively sovereign, to raise an army of common citizens, a militia, to ensure the security of the state."

This statement is incorrect. The Militia Act did so, but the 2nd Amendment does NOT provide for the formation of a militia. You could lop off the 'A well regulated milita being necessary to the security of a free state,' and not change the functional nature of the amendment one iota.

The statement is not incorrect. The implication you find in it is incorrect. The Second Amendment is not a detailed script for legislation. It is a declaration of the People's right, a statement of principle. Subsequent legislation may or may not have supplemented it.

But the meaning is clear. Several Supreme Court decisions make it quite clear, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, is not in any way whatever dependend upon their membership in any Militia.

Your argument suggests a misapprehension of the term "militia" as it is used in the Second Amendment. You seem to think it is a discrete body, as if membership in the militia is akin to membership in a club or in a community organization. That's not the meaning of the word in the Second Amendment. As it is used in the Second Amendment, "militia" is the citizenry considered in their capacity to act as soldiers. Compare with the capacity of citizens (and others) to act as consumers and purchasers of goods and services. In that capacity, we would call them the "market." The word is a generality used in a statement of political philosophy.

Secondly, as a statement of political philosopy, the Second Amendment isn't concerned with the possession of physical objects. It is concerned with the establishment of principles. The phrase "keep and bear arms" doesn't mean own and carry guns. It means "manage and serve in the military."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
  -Come and take it. Joe Steel  Apr-25-09 08:01 AM   #0 
  - I'm not a gun guy, but I think the Constitution would resist a serious  tekisui   Apr-25-09 08:04 AM   #1 
  - The politics of victimization  peace frog   Apr-25-09 08:04 AM   #2 
  - OK, first of all it's moron, not moran ya moron  rl6214   Apr-27-09 11:52 AM   #39 
     - On DU it's 'moran' - you need to get out of the gungeon once in a while  petronius   Apr-27-09 12:19 PM   #42 
  - That's what those drones and their smartbombs are for. n/t  Ian David   Apr-25-09 08:13 AM   #3 
  - Yeah I heard those work great inurban residential area's.  yay   Apr-25-09 09:36 AM   #9 
  - So you hope the government deploys those weapons against law abiding citizens?  Fire_Medic_Dave   Apr-25-09 06:40 PM   #23 
  - Yes we could resist.  Tim01   Apr-25-09 08:25 AM   #4 
  - Longer than you think.  Joe Steel   Apr-27-09 07:15 AM   #24 
     - you mean like  one-eyed fat man   Apr-27-09 01:00 PM   #55 
        - Exactly.  Joe Steel   Apr-27-09 05:12 PM   #73 
        - vermin, that's telling..............  one-eyed fat man   Apr-28-09 09:01 AM   #83 
           - Joe's got BEIKVFMcG syndrome...  friendly_iconoclast   Apr-29-09 03:18 PM   #116 
           - What good is a majority if they do bad things?  Joe Steel   Apr-29-09 04:49 PM   #118 
        - No majority vote required to enact sweeping legislation when  Howzit   Apr-28-09 11:16 AM   #87 
  - How can they take a gun if they don't know you have it?  Uben   Apr-25-09 08:37 AM   #5 
  - You are assuming legal guns are registered - like there is a long list  old mark   Apr-25-09 08:49 AM   #6 
     - No, I did not make that assumption  Uben   Apr-25-09 08:54 AM   #8 
        - Please forgive my misunderstanding. Many people evidently  old mark   Apr-25-09 11:43 AM   #16 
  - Something of an implied strawman.  dairydog91   Apr-25-09 08:50 AM   #7 
  - Would you throw-away everything you have to keep your gun?  Joe Steel   Apr-27-09 07:18 AM   #25 
     - Ah, the million dollar question.  gorfle   Apr-27-09 10:06 AM   #33 
     - The Founders fought for the right of self-government and all it entails.  Joe Steel   Apr-27-09 12:20 PM   #43 
        - I don't understand.  gorfle   Apr-27-09 01:05 PM   #56 
           - By defnition, democracy is not tyranny.  Joe Steel   Apr-27-09 02:39 PM   #67 
              - Have you been asleep for the last 8 years?  gorfle   Apr-27-09 05:31 PM   #75 
              - Not me.  Joe Steel   Apr-28-09 07:38 AM   #80 
                 - On militias  gorfle   Apr-28-09 10:37 AM   #85 
                    - That's the whole point.  Joe Steel   Apr-29-09 06:52 AM   #102 
                       - Glad we agree.  gorfle   Apr-29-09 09:33 AM   #105 
                       - VOLAR  one-eyed fat man   Apr-29-09 04:23 PM   #117 
                          - Validation of my interpretation of the Second Amendment...  Joe Steel   Apr-29-09 04:55 PM   #119 
                             - that is a stretch  one-eyed fat man   Apr-29-09 05:45 PM   #120 
                                - You've missed the point entirely.  Joe Steel   May-01-09 06:37 AM   #124 
              - Checking definitions...  dairydog91   Apr-28-09 10:53 AM   #86 
              - What is your "proper understanding of the Second Amendment"...  SteveM   Apr-29-09 10:32 AM   #107 
                 - The proper understanding of the Second Amendment is...  Joe Steel   Apr-29-09 12:30 PM   #110 
                    - Faulty and wrong...  SteveM   Apr-29-09 01:02 PM   #111 
                    - Accurate and correct.  Joe Steel   Apr-29-09 01:08 PM   #112 
                    - Wasting your time..  X_Digger   Apr-29-09 01:47 PM   #113 
                    - "Militia" as used in the constitution certainly means a very specific thing -  jmg257   May-01-09 12:52 PM   #127 
     - Would you throw-away everything you have to keep your Vote?  DonP   Apr-27-09 11:25 AM   #36 
     - If it came down to that  AtheistCrusader   Apr-27-09 11:40 AM   #37 
     - This is not about anything else.  Joe Steel   Apr-27-09 05:14 PM   #74 
        - Would you disregard a law that forbid you to express your opinion?  AtheistCrusader   Apr-27-09 05:45 PM   #78 
           - No...  Joe Steel   Apr-28-09 07:40 AM   #81 
              - Which could mean anything.  AtheistCrusader   Apr-28-09 12:01 PM   #88 
              - In a democracy we trust the judgment of the majority.  Joe Steel   Apr-28-09 12:33 PM   #90 
                 - Good thing I don't live in a Democracy.  inkool   Apr-28-09 12:42 PM   #92 
                 - The United States is a representative democracy.  Joe Steel   Apr-28-09 01:02 PM   #96 
                    - Um, no.  inkool   Apr-28-09 01:36 PM   #97 
                       - Um, yes.  Joe Steel   Apr-28-09 02:02 PM   #98 
                          - It's a "Constitutional Republic", or a "Federal Constitutional Republic"...  dairydog91   Apr-28-09 02:10 PM   #99 
                          - The United States is a Democracy  Joe Steel   Apr-29-09 06:54 AM   #103 
                             - Yes the power does reside in the people, kind of.  inkool   Apr-29-09 07:40 AM   #104 
                          - CIA World Factbook  inkool   Apr-28-09 02:25 PM   #101 
                 - That's nice. The United States is a Republic.  AtheistCrusader   Apr-28-09 12:46 PM   #94 
                 - That's nice. But in THIS nation we have the Bill of Rights, which protects our basic rights, even  jmg257   May-01-09 07:56 PM   #128 
              - So much for a Constitutional Democracy...  SteveM   Apr-29-09 10:42 AM   #108 
     - look at it the other way  backwoodsbob   Apr-29-09 07:18 PM   #121 
  - I think you  rrneck   Apr-25-09 10:12 AM   #10 
  - Agree  Caliman73   Apr-25-09 06:33 PM   #21 
  - I think you may be right about the agitation...  Joe Steel   Apr-27-09 07:23 AM   #26 
     - Remember the movie "Wag the Dog"?  rrneck   Apr-27-09 12:10 PM   #40 
  - So far we've resisted  kudzu22   Apr-25-09 10:13 AM   #11 
  - Do you anti-gun guys and gals really believe the majority of LEO and military would support you? n/t  jody   Apr-25-09 10:24 AM   #12 
  - I agree. I know most of the local police officers...  spin   Apr-25-09 11:34 AM   #15 
  - i'm in WA  paulsby   Apr-27-09 12:26 PM   #46 
  - anyone heard of oath-keepers?  biermeister   Apr-25-09 02:32 PM   #19 
  - Doesn't make any difference.  Joe Steel   Apr-27-09 07:30 AM   #27 
     - Seems to me  one-eyed fat man   Apr-27-09 09:24 AM   #30 
     - Militias are defined by the nature of their members not the ownership of their arms.  Joe Steel   Apr-27-09 12:17 PM   #41 
        - partially true  one-eyed fat man   Apr-27-09 02:23 PM   #66 
           - "The militia is only effective as a curb on Federal power if ..."  gorfle   Apr-28-09 12:44 PM   #93 
     - OP asked "Do you gun guys really believe you could resist a serious effort to disarm you?"  jody   Apr-27-09 10:17 AM   #35 
     - Clear?  Joe Steel   Apr-27-09 12:32 PM   #49 
        - You claim your opinion "represent a fair analysis of the relevant material" but you don't cite  jody   Apr-27-09 01:19 PM   #57 
        - And here we find the arguments by authority, coupled with ad hominems  friendly_iconoclast   Apr-27-09 02:50 PM   #68 
     - Inaccurate.  AtheistCrusader   Apr-27-09 11:43 AM   #38 
        - Nope.  Joe Steel   Apr-27-09 12:33 PM   #50 
           - That may be so, but the 2nd speaks nothing about it.  AtheistCrusader   Apr-27-09 01:33 PM   #61 
              - The statement is not incorrect.  Joe Steel   Apr-28-09 12:20 PM   #89 
                 - What source do you have for this?  AtheistCrusader   Apr-28-09 12:54 PM   #95 
                 - BOR 101  one-eyed fat man   Apr-28-09 02:23 PM   #100 
                    - BOR 201  Joe Steel   Apr-29-09 02:20 PM   #114 
                       - go back and re read Article 1, Section 8 and 9  one-eyed fat man   Apr-29-09 11:53 PM   #123 
                          - Everything looked OK until...  Joe Steel   May-01-09 08:14 AM   #125 
                             - tortured logic  one-eyed fat man   May-01-09 10:46 AM   #126 
  - A small percentage of "assault weapons" owners would resist...  spin   Apr-25-09 10:28 AM   #13 
  - You can bet there will be some "accidents" as well.  yay   Apr-25-09 10:31 AM   #14 
  - And who, pray tell, would lead the way in this dubious hypothetical enterprise?  east texas lib   Apr-25-09 12:34 PM   #17 
  - The guy in Pittsburgh thought he could, and he shot 3 cops, and lived.  jmg257   Apr-25-09 01:40 PM   #18 
  - "Gun guys" are not a homogeneous group  Howzit   Apr-25-09 05:28 PM   #20 
  - A serious effort from you. I'm positive a small child with a water pistol could resist that effort.  Fire_Medic_Dave   Apr-25-09 06:37 PM   #22 
  - Yes I think gun owners could resist.  NewMoonTherian   Apr-27-09 07:58 AM   #28 
  - Translation from the historian Herodotus  DonP   Apr-27-09 08:46 AM   #29 
  - The Spartans were fighting a foreign invader not their fellow citizens.  Joe Steel   Apr-27-09 12:23 PM   #44 
     - Not trying to debate, just inform  DonP   Apr-27-09 03:36 PM   #70 
     - Is it?  Joe Steel   Apr-28-09 12:38 PM   #91 
        - again,  one-eyed fat man   Apr-29-09 09:51 AM   #106 
     - The consensus among the Molon Labe contingent...  NewMoonTherian   Apr-27-09 04:29 PM   #72 
  - On resistance.  gorfle   Apr-27-09 09:59 AM   #31 
  - Certainly.  Joe Steel   Apr-27-09 12:26 PM   #45 
     - Apparently you've accepted tryanny...  Pullo   Apr-27-09 12:32 PM   #48 
     - No.  Joe Steel   Apr-27-09 12:34 PM   #51 
        - I guess we are in agreement there....  Pullo   Apr-27-09 01:31 PM   #59 
     - In what way?  gorfle   Apr-27-09 01:32 PM   #60 
     - I know not what course others may take...  jmg257   May-01-09 09:18 PM   #129 
  - Cosmoline is your friend, Joe  Pullo   Apr-27-09 10:04 AM   #32 
  - So they would resist...  Joe Steel   Apr-27-09 12:30 PM   #47 
  - But they are law-abiding until the government tries to  spin   Apr-27-09 12:41 PM   #53 
  - Exemption?  Joe Steel   Apr-27-09 12:59 PM   #54 
     - kinda depends..............  one-eyed fat man   Apr-27-09 01:19 PM   #58 
     - The second million dollar question.  gorfle   Apr-27-09 01:46 PM   #63 
     - A law is a codification of popular consent. Every time  rrneck   Apr-27-09 03:14 PM   #69 
     - Kind of like that Martin Luther King Jr. guy, huh?  DonP   Apr-27-09 03:43 PM   #71 
        - Very well said.  gorfle   Apr-27-09 05:34 PM   #77 
        - Dr. King advocated non-violent protest not armed resistence.  Joe Steel   Apr-28-09 08:55 AM   #82 
           - That was his choice  DonP   Apr-28-09 09:44 AM   #84 
  - On "law abiding"  gorfle   Apr-27-09 01:38 PM   #62 
     - Lost cause..  X_Digger   Apr-27-09 02:14 PM   #64 
        - Ah, I see.  gorfle   Apr-27-09 05:32 PM   #76 
  - I also know people who refuse to get a carry permit...  spin   Apr-27-09 12:35 PM   #52 
     - Very true...  Pullo   Apr-27-09 02:22 PM   #65 
  - In the aggregate, yes. (n/t)  benEzra   Apr-27-09 10:08 AM   #34 
  - quick answer: no  bossy22   Apr-27-09 05:49 PM   #79 
  - The short answer is "yes."....  SteveM   Apr-29-09 10:49 AM   #109 
  - Ask the mujahideen.  FudaFuda   Apr-29-09 03:12 PM   #115 
  - Yeah, we could...  solinvictus   Apr-29-09 09:57 PM   #122 
  - Absolutely. The reason the RIGHT to have guns is the 2nd amendment,  old mark   May-02-09 12:53 PM   #130 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC