what do you say to people who say the 2nd amendment is for a well regulated militia..

[cajun47]

and not the individual american?

 

[SoCalShooter]

Well I have several non-THR comments then I politely remind them that it is because of individual ARMED Americans are the reason they have those liberties to take for granted and the reason the .gov is not more insidious!

 

[hornadylnl]

I am the well regulated militia. I'm an able bodied American under the cutoff age. I forget exactly what the cutoff age was then but compared to the life expectancy of then vs. now, that age would probably be 70 now.

 

[Drewcat]

You say, "you're right." (that is to the well regulated militia) Now we just have to define what a "well regulated militia" is. The Second ammendment was intended to guarantee the citizens of this country arms to defend their persons and their liberty. From their own governmnet if ever necessary (again). The militia is composed of all able bodied men (in others words, the INDIVIDUAL). It is not the national guard, because that is a government controlled entity. Their are a lot of good resources that go into the details. Study up! It's good to know your rights and why you have them.

 

[geekWithA.45]

30 second answer:

I tell them that they've been misinformed by people and groups with political agendas, and if they're genuinely interested in the history and law behind it, and are ready to approach the question openly, I'll take some quality time. Otherwise, have a nice day.

3 minute answer:

I tell them about Lawrence Tribe, Gary Kleck, and the host of others who started out believing as they did, honestly researched the question, and concluded, to their surprise, that they were wrong.


30 minute answer:

I give them copies of documents found at the top left of my blog.

120 minute answer: In search of the 2nd amendment DVD

 

[Outlaws]

If the founding fathers wanted the states/feds to be the ones with the guns, they wouldn't have used the word people, they would have used states/feds like they did in the other amendments.

 

[PracticeFreedom]

Ask them to re-read it.

If they can't/won't read what it says, only what they want it to say, then you'll NEVER convince them.

perhaps try changing the "gun" wording:

A deafening volume, being necessary to enjoy bad music, the right of the people to keep and use loudspeakers, shall not be infringed.

 

[30Cal]

The word "if" is not in the 2nd Amendment. Being a member of the militia is not a condition of ownership.

 

[Stony Lane]

In the 18th century, "well regulated" meant properly equipped and functioning. In other words, the PEOPLE had to keep their weapons ready and functioning properly in case they were needed.

 

[NeoSpud]

+1 Hornady and Drew.

IIRC, anyone between 17-42 is in the unorganized militia (USC chap 10, sect 311, right?), and Miller v US did say that the 2nd referred to military pattern weapons (which is why the guy's sawed off, being a non-mil weapon, wasn't protected from NFA regulation). By all rules and regs, I can't see any constitutional reason why I shouldn't be able to purchase the exact same weapons that the military has, assuming I can find a buyer.

I don't apply that to chemical/biological/nuclear weapons, though, as I don't think anyone, most especially the government, is responsible enough to have them. No one should be able to purchase nukes.**


**I'm not an idiot, though, and I'm not lobbying for the govt to give up all nukes etc. I just thought I'd add my "nuke exclusion clause" as a defense against the anti's response of "well if you think citizens should be able to buy machineguns, why not nuclear warheads?" The world isn't so ideal, though, and because we live with other countries that DO have nukes, of course our country should have em.

 

[ProficientRifleman]

simple

Tell them to learn how to diagram a sentence. The learn how to write a complete sentence in English. Then read the 2A again. It becomes painfully obvious.

That is too much trouble for people who would rather emote than think.

 

[Nomad101bc]

Totaly missing the point folks. It says the right to keep and bare arms shall not be infringed then makes a ";" and talks about the well regulated militia its seperating the idea. A well regulated militia just means if your intending to actively participate in groups as a para military body the government can hold you to certain standards. The right to bare arms was never ment to be infringed at all because to do so is the work of a tyrant.

 

[Outlaws]

Totaly missing the point folks. It says the right to keep and bare arms shall not be infringed then makes a ";" and talks about the well regulated militia its seperating the idea.

Where is the semi-colon ";"?

http://usinfo.state.gov/usa/infousa/facts/funddocs/billeng.htm

 

[AK103K]

The same thing I tell anyone anti gun who likes to let me know it....

I hand them my cell phone and show them my "big" pocket knife ( dont want to scare them with my gun ) then tell them to dial 911, and I'll wait till they get connected before I kill them, that way the police wont have to come out to make a report.

Its usually not worth arguing with anyone, but especially people who have been educated beyond their intelligence.

 

[noops]

Besides the subjugated clause in the second amendment mentioned above, there is also the definition of Well Regulated militia, which

Section 311 of US Code Title 10 which details Militia Classes states:

(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.

(b) The classes of the militia are —

(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and

(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

The key is of course (2).

Noops

 

[ServiceSoon]

I show them the federalist paper where there are a few quotes that clear up any confusion.

"The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed."
-- Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers at 184-188

"[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."
--James Madison, The Federalist Papers, No. 46

 

[eliphalet]

and not the individual American?

It is kinda my understanding that the ARMED individual American IS the militia.

 

[Colt46]

It's in the Bill Of Rights

Rights are for the individual to protect them from government. How can rights extend to the government?

 

[collateral]

US Code, TITLE 10, Subtitle A, PART I, CHAPTER 13

(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

There you go, the provision for the unorganized militia, common citizens ARE included in the militia. And if someone thinks that with all of the laws concerning firearms in this country that we ARENT "well regulated," I would tell them that they are out of their mind.

 

[hksw]

Amendment II

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 would ask them, does the "people" stated in the 2nd A mean the general public (non-military, law enforcement, etc.) or the militia? When they say it is meant to be representative of the militia, I would ask them does the "people" stated in the 1st A also mean militia?

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

 

[AndyC]

Like some of the others have said, I point out that it's a right of the people - just like the other Amendments

 

[joab]

Totaly missing the point folks. It says the right to keep and bare arms shall not be infringed then makes a ";" and talks about the well regulated militia its seperating the idea. A well regulated militia just means if your intending to actively participate in groups as a para military body the government can hold you to certain standards. The right to bare arms was never ment to be infringed at all because to do so is the work of a tyrant.

Please don't use that argument, it has nothing to do with the amendment and doesn't even give the structure of the wording of the amendment correctly, you got it backwards
2A was not put in place so that the government could exert control over paramilitary groups it was put in place so that the militia of the United State (we the people) could be properly armed against all enemies foreign or domestic
The framers were against a standing army that is why the C&C is a civilian position

If you deliver false or uniformed arguments them you become counter productive when they go home to google where you should have gone before making the argument
At that point you have lost credibility that you will never get back

It's the same when people misquote Jefferson's
"No free man shall ever be de-barred the use of arms. ...
With out adding the rest of the quote
...While on his own lands or tenements"

 

[mike101]

We Are The Militia

And that's what you tell them. Then, you show them the US Code, wherein "militia" is defined.

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode10/usc_sec_10_00000311----000-.html

 

[Wayne G.]

as little as possible.

 

[wjustinen]

what do you say to people who say the 2nd amendment is for a well regulated militia..

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I tell them to read the document. The necessity to have a well regulated militia is the reason given for not allowing the individual right to be infringed.