Find answers, ask questions, and connect with our
community around the world.

Firearm and Gun Forums Firearm and Gun Forums News It’s like arguing with a brick wall… The entire thing is honestly pretty entertaining to read. Will link in comments

  • It’s like arguing with a brick wall… The entire thing is honestly pretty entertaining to read. Will link in comments

     Ashley308 updated 10 months, 2 weeks ago 2 Members · 2 Posts
  • Ashley308

    Member
    December 16, 2019 at 8:43 pm

    It’s like arguing with a brick wall… The entire thing is honestly pretty entertaining to read. Will link in comments

  • AirFell85

    Guest
    December 16, 2019 at 8:43 pm

    Who gives a shit what it says? All living creatures will do whatever it takes to defend themselves by any means necessary, be it against a single overpowering entity (self defense) or a collective (government).

    The bill of rights was the best way they could think of at the time to outline these facts and prevent the government from denying that.

  • hdiaksndioxmsd

    Guest
    December 16, 2019 at 8:43 pm

    Even more importantly, “well-regulated militia” does not mean run by government with a lot of rules. Militia is the people, not the government, and well-regulated means that it is kept regular. To paraphrase, It is necessary to the security and freedom of our nation, that there is always an armed populace ready to fight.

  • guber26

    Guest
    December 16, 2019 at 8:43 pm

    Personally, I have never had any difficulty reconciling the entire sentence.

    A militia is formed, as needed, of a group of private individuals, who are expected to provide their own weapons, ammunition and supplies and have trained, on their own, sufficiently to use the same.

    If private citizens are expected to bring their own military grade weapons, and be ready to use them, in order to be capable of becoming a part of a well regulated militia, there can be no restrictions.

    Now, nobody in power has called up a militia recently. So, some might argue the rationale is outdated. However, just because it has been a while, doesn’t mean it would not happen if shit went sideways. If we were invaded by a foreign power, you can bet well regulated militias would be popping up everywhere and every Susie Gungrabber would be glad that a significant portion of the population stands ready to answer that call and make the invaders fight for every street and neighborhood.

    You can’t have a well regulated militia without well armed private citizens.

  • Flashy_Garage

    Guest
    December 16, 2019 at 8:43 pm

    I wish the antis would educate themselves on the [real meaning of well regulated.](https://constitution.org/cons/wellregu.htm)

  • Asain_Redneck

    Guest
    December 16, 2019 at 8:43 pm

    I notices that alot of gun control advocates don’t know what the comma does. It kinda scary actually, because they vote.

  • c0Y0T3cOdY

    Guest
    December 16, 2019 at 8:43 pm

    Lol complains about the US murder rate per capita, thinks its about guns but that includes all homicides… the per capita rate of homicides of all rifles in the US is 0.09 (per 100,000 – 2018) far less than their knife murder rate of .43 per capita (per 100,000 – 2017)… The reason I bring up solely rifles is because we are talking “assault weapons” ban.

  • [deleted]

    Guest
    December 16, 2019 at 8:43 pm

    [removed]

  • Johnnyboy716

    Guest
    December 16, 2019 at 8:43 pm

    Whenever someone brings this up, just send the the DC vs. Hellee ruling where the SCOTUS ruled that the 2nd Amendment specifically protects the individual’s right to possess a firearm.

  • krypto272

    Guest
    December 16, 2019 at 8:43 pm

    The militia is the people. The Founding Fathers despised the idea of a peace time standing military which is why they choose to have the militia clause in 2A. The militia are people who stand up in times of turmoil to defend freedom and liberty, not some Army who roles in with tanks and helicopters at the will of the government. However, they changed the term to the people in the second half to make clear that if someone ever got the idea that the militia meant a government standing army (or state war lord type armies) that the people not in these established organizations could still possess weapons.

    TL;DR militia = people not military.

  • number__ten

    Guest
    December 16, 2019 at 8:43 pm

    Some people: Why should I care about the opinions of people who lived hundred of years ago with outdated ideas?

    Same people: These people from hundreds of years ago used these exact words which I will now take out of context against you.

  • CLxJames

    Guest
    December 16, 2019 at 8:43 pm

    “I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials.”
    — George Mason, co-author of the 2nd Amendment.

    “Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American… The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.” – Tenche Coxe, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.

  • Gretshus

    Guest
    December 16, 2019 at 8:43 pm

    There’s only 1 grammatically correct way to read the 2nd amendment: “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

    The part of “being necessary to the security of a free State” can be omitted from the sentence as it is a justification for the “militia” part. As such, it can be shortened to “A well regulated militia, the right to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”. As pointed out by another comment, “well regulated” did not mean government enforced, but instead meant “in working order” or “functioning as expected” ([https://constitution.org/cons/wellregu.htm](https://constitution.org/cons/wellregu.htm)). This indicates that the amendment can be rephrased as “A functional militia, the right to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”, which indicates that the second amendment protects people’s rights to form militias and to bear arms (providing the justification that militias and Arms are necessary for a free State’s security). There is no dependency clause in that sentence that predicates the right to bear arms on being a member of a militia (government or otherwise).

    Wouldn’t it just be a little bit strange for the Founding Fathers to write an amendment that lists what the government can do that people can’t in a document that is intended to list everything the government can’t stop you from doing?

  • MrZimothy

    Guest
    December 16, 2019 at 8:43 pm

    I was always taught that, for the period of its writing, “militia” meant any fighting force comprised of the people in that locale, and that “well regulated” meant prepared to fight (training, procedure, discipline, etc). I was taught it never meant “a bunch of racists in a compound” or “controlled and organized by the government”. But that seems to be the rhetoric these days.

    Whats funny? Watch the attitudes of those same people shift sides the minute nobody answers 911 and their armed neighbors show up to assist them.

  • notmattherr

    Guest
    December 16, 2019 at 8:43 pm

    I never understood the “army is the militia” argument. Why the hell would the government have to outline its own right to have guns? Even if you don’t read the supplemental documents that make the founding fathers’ feelings clear, it’s obvious what the intent of the 2A is

  • JJJ_99

    Guest
    December 16, 2019 at 8:43 pm

    Add that thread to the list of things I wish I never read. Absolute nutcases.

  • Zefram71

    Guest
    December 16, 2019 at 8:43 pm

    The first commenter either doesn’t understand the meaning of “regulated” in the amendment, or is misrepresenting it. Grats to the second one pointing out it doesn’t say the militia has the right to bear arms, it’s the people. Everywhere in the constitution “the people” means every citizen.

  • spoulson

    Guest
    December 16, 2019 at 8:43 pm

    Easy resolution: Any able bodied man can be in a militia. So, uh, I just started a militia. Wanna join?

  • John_Liberty

    Guest
    December 16, 2019 at 8:43 pm

    Dude who cares what a piece of paper says? Do you have a hand? If so then congrats you can own a gun. If you have the capacity to own a gun then you can own a gun. It’s that simple.

  • DefinitelyNotADemon

    Guest
    December 16, 2019 at 8:43 pm

    I actually wrote my freshman polisci dissertation on the importance of the second amendment and the protections afforded by the militia code to understanding the historical and modern day meaning of the amendment.

    The militia code dictates that every able bodied person, from ages 18 to 45, who are not a part of the national guard, constitute the unorganized militia. This isn’t just an old paper from long ago either, it was updated at recently at 2016 and is still standing.

    In short, we are actually urged to take up arms, by the founders, in order to protect the existence of a free state. It is not only our right, but our duty, to protect this country from any threat, even our own government.

    Boogaloo time!

  • gawrbage

    Guest
    December 16, 2019 at 8:43 pm

    I’m joining this war with you brother, it’s our job to educate the masses.

  • PinheadLarry2323

    Guest
    December 16, 2019 at 8:43 pm

    Just send them this:

  • offacough

    Guest
    December 16, 2019 at 8:43 pm

    [Try this.](https://www.constitution.org/cons/wellregu.htm)

    *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.*

  • GURBOchad

    Guest
    December 16, 2019 at 8:43 pm

    I don’t get why constitution is a reference point at first place. People should have the right to bear arms because it is the right thing, not because a piece of paper says so. It just happens to be the more reasonable type of paper

  • StarCommand1

    Guest
    December 16, 2019 at 8:43 pm

    I never understood why this was ever an argument that advocates of gun control make. I mean the reading comprehension to understand this is taught in 4th grade… It’s like they are calling themselves stupid.

  • Rex-Kramer

    Guest
    December 16, 2019 at 8:43 pm

    I just ask, US just fought a war against a tyrannical government. Do really you think they didn’t want the citizens to have arms?

  • Trunky_Coastal_Kid

    Guest
    December 16, 2019 at 8:43 pm

    The militia are just armed citizens, though. You and I are militia. Therefore we have the right to bear arms. That’s the way I look at it.

  • cdman2004

    Guest
    December 16, 2019 at 8:43 pm

    Do they not know that the militia is the people?

    Do they also not realize that “we’ll regulated” meant “well working” also? (This was written before a time when regulating was more commonly known as “making rules for something”)

  • rslash_copy

    Guest
    December 16, 2019 at 8:43 pm

    I don’t think these people realize that the commas were basically periods back at this time. The rules of grammar changed. You just look at this with today’s standards

  • SnakeDoctor00

    Guest
    December 16, 2019 at 8:43 pm

    So does that mean the dude deleted himself since the comments are still up but the u/ says deleted?

    I guarantee he’s one of the “if it saves just ONE life it’s worth it” people.

  • immortalsauce

    Guest
    December 16, 2019 at 8:43 pm

    Not to mention a milita is an army not funded or created by the state. WE as CITIZENS make up a militia. Foreign country invades? Military is slow? We would form militas without the states involvement.

  • CrimsonReign07

    Guest
    December 16, 2019 at 8:43 pm

    “A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined…”
    – George Washington, First Annual Address, to both House of Congress, January 8, 1790

    “What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms.”
    – Thomas Jefferson, letter to James Madison, December 20, 1787

    “The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed.”
    – Thomas Jefferson, letter to to John Cartwright, 5 June 1824

    “I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers.”
    – George Mason, Address to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 4, 1788

    “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country.”
    – James Madison, I Annals of Congress 434, June 8, 1789

    “The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes…. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.”
    – Thomas Jefferson, Commonplace Book (quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria), 1774-1776

    “Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined…. The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun.”
    – Patrick Henry, Speech to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 5, 1778

    “On every occasion [of Constitutional interpretation] let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying [to force] what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, [instead let us] conform to the probable one in which it was passed.”
    – Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Johnson, 12 June 1823

    I mean there’s plenty more… but no, definitely, the founding fathers in no way meant for people to have or carry their own weapons. I mean, where would anyone get an idea like that…?

Reply to: Ashley308
Your information:

Cancel
Original Post
0 of 0 posts June 2018
Now