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: The militia [View all]discntnt_irny_srcsm
(18,475 posts)82. Responses:
"Does any other country have a right to own guns in their founding documents?"
I don't know. IMHO, neither case would validate or invalidate such an inclusion in our BoR.
At the time standing armies owed their continued positions and livelihood to the central government. Folks believed in the governments and infrastructures they had developed and wanted to restrain a more distant and remote government. Please note that there is no Constitutional prohibition on a standing army but sentiment against one was strong. Militias were used and were effective in fighting the Revolution. Each person (white males of age that is) had the right and duty to be armed and serve.
Let me not argue for the court but only quote:
{ (T)he people seems to have been a term of art employed in select parts of the Constitution
. (Its uses) sugges(t) that the people protected by the Fourth Amendment , and by the First and Second Amendment s, and to whom rights and powers are reserved in the Ninth and Tenth Amendment s, refers to a class of persons who are part of a national community or who have otherwise developed sufficient connection with this country to be considered part of that community.
This contrasts markedly with the phrase the militia in the prefatory clause. As we will describe below, the militia in colonial America consisted of a subset of the peoplethose who were male, able bodied, and within a certain age range. Reading the Second Amendment as protecting only the right to keep and bear Arms in an organized militia therefore fits poorly with the operative clauses description of the holder of that right as the people.
We start therefore with a strong presumption that the Second Amendment right is exercised individually and belongs to all Americans.}
This contrasts markedly with the phrase the militia in the prefatory clause. As we will describe below, the militia in colonial America consisted of a subset of the peoplethose who were male, able bodied, and within a certain age range. Reading the Second Amendment as protecting only the right to keep and bear Arms in an organized militia therefore fits poorly with the operative clauses description of the holder of that right as the people.
We start therefore with a strong presumption that the Second Amendment right is exercised individually and belongs to all Americans.}
"Now I do feel we should be able to own guns but it should not be an absolute right free from regulation."
I don't believe there are any rights absolute and free from regulation, do you?
Thanks for your 'pass'. Wouldn't your position fit one of the first 2 choices?
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
105 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
That would be: The Second Amendment exists solely as a restriction on the federal government
Decoy of Fenris
Jul 2013
#10
After a brief fresher, point granted, and my prior post rescinded. Thank you for the education. nt
Decoy of Fenris
Jul 2013
#16
It is an individual right, but the poll goes to the militia responsibility of the government.
Eleanors38
Jul 2013
#89
Be careful what you wish for. Reinterpretation doesn't mean "How I want it." :) n/t
Decoy of Fenris
Jul 2013
#14
Like I said. Be careful what you wish for. Try to reinterpret at your own risk. nt
Decoy of Fenris
Jul 2013
#18
Might want to check those articles I linked earlier. You'll find out how often you're wrong. :)
Decoy of Fenris
Jul 2013
#61
No. I think I'll let you tell me about the standing/active duty professional military........
rdharma
Jul 2013
#62
"Are you a member of the National Guard or the Naval militia? No? Unorganized militia."
Decoy of Fenris
Jul 2013
#67
No, because he's 64. And I never said "All", either; just that it is allowed. n/t
Decoy of Fenris
Jul 2013
#28
Also, 32 USC § 323 supplementing USC § 311 and Title 10 as a whole. n/t
Decoy of Fenris
Jul 2013
#25
Good thing laws stop them from owning guns. Otherwise, they'd kill someo... Oh. Nevermind. n/t
Decoy of Fenris
Jul 2013
#33
Good thing we don't have laws in place that could stop or make it harder for them to acquire guns.
rdharma
Jul 2013
#35
Stop letting kids kill other kids with -anything-. There's a thought. n/t
Decoy of Fenris
Jul 2013
#32
And at no point is "The gun" at fault in that scenario. Thank you for pointing that out. n/t
Decoy of Fenris
Jul 2013
#40
But you're wrong. That's the point. Your entire premise, and execution of analogy, are incorrect.
Decoy of Fenris
Jul 2013
#44
Actually, he was talking to me since non-gun-related deaths are not an issue for the Controllers. nt
Decoy of Fenris
Jul 2013
#45
I'm always sad for the deaths of children, regardless of cause. Aren't you?
Decoy of Fenris
Jul 2013
#51
Nope, just good old fashioned clicking the wrong reply button. Only human. :P
Decoy of Fenris
Jul 2013
#53