Over the last week on other sites, and other public venues, there have been a flury of anti-gun nut attacks on our rights. There are the same tired arguments over and over, along with the usual misleading stats, mis-read court citings, and WRONG "meanings" of the 2nd posted as facts. Here is a start at getting things straight...
Note: While there are of course TONS of quotes by the founders supporting our interpretation of the 2nd (i.e. - it means what it says), it is often good to rely on the actual document - 'cause, unlike the Supreme Court, it can never be wrong! So, let's start there...
The US Constitution (1788) gave powers in Article 1 Section 8 Clause 15 & 16 to the Congress that were formally powers of the states - to provide for organizing, arming and disciplining THE Militia and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, and "to provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions". {Congress 1st provided for this in the Militia Act of 1792 - the people armed themselves AS ALWAYS - with longarms AND pistols, discipline was via Van Stuben's Blue Book, organization was spelled out, and the Militia would be called it by the President etc. etc.}. The states kept the powers for the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to what Congress came up with.
In the Bill of Rights (1791), WHICH AMENDED THE CONSTITUTION, along with other individual rights, the people wanted to MAKE SURE the Congress with their new power could NOT infringe on THEIR Right to keep and bear arms, and would NOT do away with THE well-armed and well-trained militias. They protected the former explicitly in the restrrcitive clause, and further recognized and "required" the latter in the declarative, both part of the 2nd Amendment. Infringement is unconstitutional, and so is malfeasance with regards to the militia.
Because the 2nd ALSO became part of "the supreme law of the Land" {Article VI} - "anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding", NEITHER could the States infringe on the right to keep and bear arms, nor make THE Militia obsolete.
That is it - the 2nd "requires" THE well-armed well trained Militia of the several states, AND protects THE Right of the people; ALL as the supreme Law of the Land.
Other points:
THE Militia existed already, "the militia of the several states" is well-recognized as exisiting by the constitution, is recognized as permanent and necessary, AND recognized as separate from the Army & Navy. ("The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States;"). Congress did NOT get power to create it, or re-create it! The Guard is NOT THE militia - it was federally created and is federally armed - it is a reserve OF THE ARMY (and air force), and it is useless to serve in the roles required of it by the constitution if it is overseas.
Now, I KNOW what is the current law and code, I KNOW how the constitutional militia has been rendered obsolete - right, wrong or unconstitutionally - but let's make SURE what the "intent" of the 2nd "was", isn't re-defined because of what "IS" now. Besides, we all are mostly still part of the "unorganized militia".
The Right of the people to keep and bear arms also existed already - it was secured in the original militia clauses, and is further recognized AND PROTECTED by the 2nd amendment - AS A a personal right!
The 1st Senate had a motion to add "for the common defence" after "bear arms" to the article which became the 2nd - they REJECTED it.
Tell all those doubters - "Don't like the amendment - get it changed, but DO NOT be dishonest about what it says by trying to change what it means!"
Note: While there are of course TONS of quotes by the founders supporting our interpretation of the 2nd (i.e. - it means what it says), it is often good to rely on the actual document - 'cause, unlike the Supreme Court, it can never be wrong! So, let's start there...
The US Constitution (1788) gave powers in Article 1 Section 8 Clause 15 & 16 to the Congress that were formally powers of the states - to provide for organizing, arming and disciplining THE Militia and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, and "to provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions". {Congress 1st provided for this in the Militia Act of 1792 - the people armed themselves AS ALWAYS - with longarms AND pistols, discipline was via Van Stuben's Blue Book, organization was spelled out, and the Militia would be called it by the President etc. etc.}. The states kept the powers for the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to what Congress came up with.
In the Bill of Rights (1791), WHICH AMENDED THE CONSTITUTION, along with other individual rights, the people wanted to MAKE SURE the Congress with their new power could NOT infringe on THEIR Right to keep and bear arms, and would NOT do away with THE well-armed and well-trained militias. They protected the former explicitly in the restrrcitive clause, and further recognized and "required" the latter in the declarative, both part of the 2nd Amendment. Infringement is unconstitutional, and so is malfeasance with regards to the militia.
Because the 2nd ALSO became part of "the supreme law of the Land" {Article VI} - "anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding", NEITHER could the States infringe on the right to keep and bear arms, nor make THE Militia obsolete.
That is it - the 2nd "requires" THE well-armed well trained Militia of the several states, AND protects THE Right of the people; ALL as the supreme Law of the Land.
Other points:
THE Militia existed already, "the militia of the several states" is well-recognized as exisiting by the constitution, is recognized as permanent and necessary, AND recognized as separate from the Army & Navy. ("The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States;"). Congress did NOT get power to create it, or re-create it! The Guard is NOT THE militia - it was federally created and is federally armed - it is a reserve OF THE ARMY (and air force), and it is useless to serve in the roles required of it by the constitution if it is overseas.
Now, I KNOW what is the current law and code, I KNOW how the constitutional militia has been rendered obsolete - right, wrong or unconstitutionally - but let's make SURE what the "intent" of the 2nd "was", isn't re-defined because of what "IS" now. Besides, we all are mostly still part of the "unorganized militia".
The Right of the people to keep and bear arms also existed already - it was secured in the original militia clauses, and is further recognized AND PROTECTED by the 2nd amendment - AS A a personal right!
The 1st Senate had a motion to add "for the common defence" after "bear arms" to the article which became the 2nd - they REJECTED it.
Tell all those doubters - "Don't like the amendment - get it changed, but DO NOT be dishonest about what it says by trying to change what it means!"
Last edited: