PDA

View Full Version : What is 2A?


Paragun
02-06-2010, 6:31 PM
I hope I'm not repeating what others might have said, but I do not see any argument for this amendment. It is quite plain and simple and to the point.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

I believe this to mean two things.
One: It provides states the ability to defend themselves as a state.
Two: It provides the people the right to bear arms. If it meant only a militia, it would read:
,the right of the militia to keep and bear arms....

It does not limit the type of arms, loaded/unloaded, or the amount of ammo you can have. If you want a howitzer in your front yard, so be it.
It does not say where, when, how.
Some people want to try to argue the wording or grammar of this amendment, but these are the thoughts and quotes of the people who shaped, wrote, and signed the constitution of the United States, at least what I could find so far.
Quotes:

Samuel Adams

"How strangely will the Tools of a Tyrant pervert the plain Meaning of Words!"
"Among the natural rights of the colonists are these: First a right to life, secondly to liberty, and thirdly to property; together with the right to defend them in the best manner they can."
"The Constitution shall never be construed... to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms."
"The liberties of our country, the freedom of our civil constitution, are worth defending against all hazards: And it is our duty to defend them against all attacks."
"The natural liberty of man is to be free from any superior power on Earth, and not to be under the will or legislative authority of man, but only to have the law of nature for his rule."
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/s/samuel_adams.html

George Washington

"Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the peoples' liberty's teeth."
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/g/george_washington.html

James Madison

"Americans have the right and advantage of being armed - unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms."
"If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy."
"No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare."
"The Constitution preserves the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation where the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms."
"We are right to take alarm at the first experiment upon our liberties."

This next quote defines who will be "in" a militia for defense, but not to limit the "people" of bearing arms. See his other quotes.

"A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained in arms, is the best most natural defense of a free country."
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/j/james_madison.html

Gouverneur Morris

"Americans need never fear their government because of the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation."
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/g/gouverneur_morris.html

wildhawker
02-06-2010, 6:33 PM
For a primer on 2A see Heller (http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/07-290.ZS.html), McDonald (http://www.chicagoguncase.com/case-filings/#SupremeCourt)and related briefs.

Cokebottle
02-06-2010, 6:42 PM
Bingo.

Keeping in mind that the Constitution is a list of limitations on the Government (not a list of rights granted TO the people)... Those who assign equivalency of "well regulated militia" and "US Military" are completely missing the boat.


I really wish that it were possible to travel back in time and give Jefferson a little nudge and say "Hey buddy, would you mind leaving out that little 'militia' part, and maybe add 'and ammunition' after arms?"

Paragun
02-06-2010, 6:45 PM
Yes, I have read everything I find here and on the news. But it all sounds twisted and perverted to me.
To keep and bear arms means to me to have and carry (or bear) arms.

Paragun
02-06-2010, 6:49 PM
Bingo.

I really wish that it were possible to travel back in time and give Jefferson a little nudge and say "Hey buddy, would you mind leaving out that little 'militia' part, and maybe add 'and ammunition' after arms?"

But to be armed a firearm MUST have ammunition. Unloaded you are not "armed".

Cokebottle
02-06-2010, 7:20 PM
But to be armed a firearm MUST have ammunition. Unloaded you are not "armed".
I agree... but even if the gun grabbers concede that we have the right to bear arms, they then push for ammo regulations, and are being quite successful at it.

Incorporation and shall-issue CCW are not going to be the final battles.

GrizzlyGuy
02-06-2010, 7:43 PM
Unfortunately it's not that simple, thanks largely to the unnecessary prefatory clause that has been our bane. For example, read this article (http://www.cardozolawreview.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=131:boyce20102&catid=20:firearmsinc&Itemid=20) by Brett Boyce with an open mind. It's a pretty persuasive argument, and shows that the opposition at least has legs to stand on.

Seesm
02-06-2010, 8:07 PM
Bingo.

Keeping in mind that the Constitution is a list of limitations on the Government (not a list of rights granted TO the people)... Those who assign equivalency of "well regulated militia" and "US Military" are completely missing the boat.


I really wish that it were possible to travel back in time and give Jefferson a little nudge and say "Hey buddy, would you mind leaving out that little 'militia' part, and maybe add 'and ammunition' after arms?"

Here here. but I say the militia part is ok with the rest you had Thomas him add.. :)

Paragun
02-06-2010, 9:59 PM
But if it is agreed that to be armed you must have ammunition , then the 2nd amendment must also protect the ammunition that goes with being armed.
Don't you think?

wildhawker
02-07-2010, 12:31 AM
Yep.

Deadred7o7
02-07-2010, 9:01 AM
Its to bad some of the "premeir gun rights" .org's dont see it as that simple.

Paragun
02-07-2010, 1:15 PM
But it is that simple. It's not a debate of religion where 70% of it is in riddle form for all to guess at. Like Samuel Adams is quoted as saying "How strangely will the Tools of a Tyrant pervert the plain Meaning of Words!". There is no debate.

wildhawker
02-07-2010, 1:26 PM
Its to bad some of the "premeir gun rights" .org's dont see it as that simple.

Such as?

Paragun
02-07-2010, 1:40 PM
Unfortunately it's not that simple, thanks largely to the unnecessary prefatory clause that has been our bane. For example, read this article (http://www.cardozolawreview.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=131:boyce20102&catid=20:firearmsinc&Itemid=20) by Brett Boyce with an open mind. It's a pretty persuasive argument, and shows that the opposition at least has legs to stand on.

But again they are just perverting the words. It does not need a "new" way of "modernizing" it. It is still English, plain English. I have read most of this article, but I have been reading a lot the last week, I never read so much since school!