|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
April 28, 2009, 06:52 PM | #51 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 20, 2005
Location: Indiana
Posts: 10,435
|
Quote:
It would appear to me that while the preferatory clause is not meaningless (I believe that the original purpose of the Second Amendment is still a valid one), neither is it a condition on which guarantee of Second Amendment rights hinges. Therefore, I would say that while the purpose of the Second Amendment is to guarantee the right of the militia to be armed, it also guarantees the rights of all the people to be armed. |
|
April 28, 2009, 07:06 PM | #52 | ||||
Senior Member
Join Date: March 31, 2005
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,775
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
"God and the Soldier we adore, in time of trouble but not before. When the danger's past and the wrong been righted, God is forgotten and the Soldier slighted." Anonymous Soldier. |
||||
April 28, 2009, 07:21 PM | #53 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 31, 2005
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,775
|
Quote:
Here is a good video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jPBm_...eature=channel and even though the Professor is not progun he is historically correct.
__________________
"God and the Soldier we adore, in time of trouble but not before. When the danger's past and the wrong been righted, God is forgotten and the Soldier slighted." Anonymous Soldier. |
|
April 28, 2009, 07:31 PM | #54 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 20, 2005
Location: Indiana
Posts: 10,435
|
Quote:
Last edited by Webleymkv; April 28, 2009 at 07:38 PM. |
|
April 28, 2009, 07:45 PM | #55 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 31, 2005
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,775
|
Quote:
__________________
"God and the Soldier we adore, in time of trouble but not before. When the danger's past and the wrong been righted, God is forgotten and the Soldier slighted." Anonymous Soldier. |
|
April 28, 2009, 07:55 PM | #56 | ||
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,660
|
Quote:
I say loosely, because at that time, it was necessary for folks who lived out in the frontier, voluntarily associated and trained with one another. This was the local militia. Often, a call to arms was given by the local magistrate or sheriff (for those jurisdictions that had them), when needed to enforce local laws against villains, ruffians or Indians (there were no such things as police, as we know them now). The call to arms was answered by the local people acting as a militia. That was then. Nowadays, most States have legislation in place to call up the militia, even if never used. Quote:
This also answers your part about resisting a tyrannical government. How? The thing to keep in mind is that at the time this nation was founded, people trusted their local (as in State) government much more than this new creation, the central government (as it was called in those times). Most were not concerned over rights violations by the States. It was the Federal Government that people feared. In the context of the times, these thoughts were undisputed. Nowadays, I suppose a scenario could be made that the Feds turned against the people and the State called the upon its citizens to defend the State. If the citizens agreed with this reasoning, then they would pose a huge obstacle to a federal takeover. However remote this possibility may be, the RKBA would stand in its (the States) stead. However, I don't believe the scenario, above, would actually play out in that manner, as we would effectively be in another civil war. Not something to think lightly upon. Also something off topic to this thread. |
||
April 28, 2009, 07:55 PM | #57 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 20, 2005
Location: Indiana
Posts: 10,435
|
Quote:
|
|
April 28, 2009, 07:56 PM | #58 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 16, 2007
Posts: 2,153
|
TG,
Again, how would you characterize the capacity in which citizens would serve, such as the ones mentioned in the Nordyke opinion, when defending the country against foreign invaders, as described by the court? Assuming arguendo that the militia is dead, isn't this nevertheless exactly the kind of contribution to the security of the state that the second amendment was designed to protect? |
April 28, 2009, 08:09 PM | #59 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: March 31, 2005
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,775
|
Quote:
Quote:
Two things killed the militia; first most Americans do not like military service and didn't want to serve (this attitude is where the term "unorganized militia" first came from, which was created to get people out of serving in the militia), and second the nature of modern warfare rendered them obsolete.
__________________
"God and the Soldier we adore, in time of trouble but not before. When the danger's past and the wrong been righted, God is forgotten and the Soldier slighted." Anonymous Soldier. |
||
April 28, 2009, 08:12 PM | #60 |
Staff
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,677
|
fuel for discussion
I think we would do well to remember that the Founders considered our right to arms, assembly, free speech, and others, as "natural" rights, frequently expressed as "God given rights". In other words, rights that we, the people (as individuals) possessed, simply because we are living breathing human beings. And they considered these rights as something separate from rights pertaining to the "state".
And that the amendments of the "Bill of Rights" did not, and do not give us anything we did not posess before it was written. The BOR is a listing of restrctions, what the government is not allowed to do, and why. Consider the important phrases such as "Congress shall make no law..." and "shall not be infringed", among others.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better. |
April 28, 2009, 08:31 PM | #61 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: March 31, 2005
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,775
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
"God and the Soldier we adore, in time of trouble but not before. When the danger's past and the wrong been righted, God is forgotten and the Soldier slighted." Anonymous Soldier. |
||
April 28, 2009, 08:32 PM | #62 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: July 20, 2005
Location: Indiana
Posts: 10,435
|
Quote:
Quote:
http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastor...20/0715763.pdf Quote:
|
|||
April 28, 2009, 08:34 PM | #63 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 4, 2007
Location: Shenandoah Valley
Posts: 3,276
|
I have to say that this has been a lot more interesting than the previous couple of discussions I've followed on this topic.
|
April 28, 2009, 08:43 PM | #64 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: March 31, 2005
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,775
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
"God and the Soldier we adore, in time of trouble but not before. When the danger's past and the wrong been righted, God is forgotten and the Soldier slighted." Anonymous Soldier. |
||
April 28, 2009, 09:05 PM | #65 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: July 20, 2005
Location: Indiana
Posts: 10,435
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
April 28, 2009, 09:18 PM | #66 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: March 31, 2005
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,775
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
"God and the Soldier we adore, in time of trouble but not before. When the danger's past and the wrong been righted, God is forgotten and the Soldier slighted." Anonymous Soldier. Last edited by Tennessee Gentleman; April 28, 2009 at 09:32 PM. |
|||
April 28, 2009, 09:29 PM | #67 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 21, 2000
Location: Minnesota, Twin Cities
Posts: 1,076
|
Tenn Gentle posted:
Quote:
__________________
"If you love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen." Samuel Adams. Last edited by USAFNoDak; April 28, 2009 at 09:45 PM. |
|
April 28, 2009, 09:37 PM | #68 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 16, 2007
Posts: 2,153
|
Quote:
I fail to see how a nuclear weapon would prevent a surreptitious attack through our demonstrably porous borders. We haven't made so much as a dent in the wholesale flow of contraband and undocumented individuals from the south. I am not suggesting an unprofessional force to deal with the border, only pointing out our vulnerability, and the irrelevance of a nuclear deterrent in domestic defense. We forget so quickly how a determined, creative enemy is capable of wreaking untold havoc in a single day. If 9/11 was only the start of an invasion, and not an isolated set of planned atrocities, we might be thinking a little differently about the role of armed citizens for immediate defense of communities. But our sense of invincibility is resilient, and illusory, in my opinion. Certainly the professional forces are the real deterrent, but they are slow to mobilize. The people, on the other hand are everywhere. That, in part, is why I believe the founders considered the whole of people the militia. I think we overlook the wisdom of that idea at our own peril. I am not ready to decide that the whole idea of the militia, or at least the capability of raising one, is useless and outdated. |
|
April 28, 2009, 09:40 PM | #69 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 31, 2005
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,775
|
Quote:
The unorganized militia laid out in the Militia Act of 1903 is not the well-regulated militia that the 2A refers to. You are mixing up militias. The proper historical lineal descendent of the 2A militia is the National Guard. Also, IF and that's a huge one, such a militia were ever called I suspect the states would supply the weapons if for no other reason pure logistics.
__________________
"God and the Soldier we adore, in time of trouble but not before. When the danger's past and the wrong been righted, God is forgotten and the Soldier slighted." Anonymous Soldier. Last edited by Tennessee Gentleman; April 28, 2009 at 09:55 PM. |
|
April 28, 2009, 09:54 PM | #70 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: March 31, 2005
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,775
|
Quote:
As to our vulnerability to terrorists I have no argument there. However, I see that as a LE job and not one for an unauthorized untrained miltia. I would be concerned about a "citizen militia" trying to do a LE job and getting caught inbetween the two and causing needless havoc. Quote:
Quote:
__________________
"God and the Soldier we adore, in time of trouble but not before. When the danger's past and the wrong been righted, God is forgotten and the Soldier slighted." Anonymous Soldier. |
|||
April 28, 2009, 09:55 PM | #71 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 21, 2000
Location: Minnesota, Twin Cities
Posts: 1,076
|
The Second Amendment "grants" nothing. The right to keep and bear arms is not a right granted by the Second Amendment, nor is it in any way dependent upon it for it's existance.
A right is a natural thing that individuals possess. The right to keep and bear arms exists outside of any government entity. A state is a government entity. The states had the "power" to arm their militias which were comprised of a subset of "the people" at the time. The Second Amendment stopped the "Central Government" from disarming the people, and one reason for this was to make sure that the states had well regulated militias, which could not be disarmed since the people could not be disarmed. If the state militias were comprised of a subset of the people, and all of the people had their rights to keep and bear arms secured by the Second Amendment, then the subset of people comprising the state militias also had their rights to be armed protected. By logic then, the state militias could not be disarmed by the "Central Government". The Second Amendment prevents disarmament of the state militias through the protection of the people's right to keep and bear arms. The two clauses are connected, but the operative clause is not dependent upon the prefatory clause as some of the anti gun folks have tried to argue. The Heller case should put that arguement on the trash pile as we go forward with the debate. Nordyke also makes a point that the Second Amendment holds against the states as well. Thus, the states cannot disarm their citizens if this holds and gets a hearing at the USSC, eventually.
__________________
"If you love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen." Samuel Adams. |
April 28, 2009, 10:06 PM | #72 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: March 31, 2005
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,775
|
Quote:
Quote:
BTW, the 2A only protected the states and individuals from the Feds. The states, however, could disarm anyone they wished and did so with freed slaves.
__________________
"God and the Soldier we adore, in time of trouble but not before. When the danger's past and the wrong been righted, God is forgotten and the Soldier slighted." Anonymous Soldier. |
||
April 28, 2009, 10:13 PM | #73 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 21, 2000
Location: Minnesota, Twin Cities
Posts: 1,076
|
Tenn Gentle:
Quote:
What if the states didn't have the weapons because their national guard was using them over in Somalia or some other rat infested country? Maybe none of this will happen in our life times. What about our kids and grand kids. What if people stop volunteering for military duty because the liberals brain wash too many kids into believing that military duty is not something that "normal" people do? Remember, the National Guard is purely voluntary. The unorganized militia is not today's functioning militia, and the functioning militia is the National Guard. I've not said this wasn't the situation. However, when the 2nd A was written, the militia was not split as it is today. Today's unorganized militia, while being a pool of potential draftees, still has members who have a right to keep and bear arms. Maybe we will have to draft them or let them volunteer to help if the SHTF.
__________________
"If you love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen." Samuel Adams. |
|
April 28, 2009, 10:18 PM | #74 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 21, 2000
Location: Minnesota, Twin Cities
Posts: 1,076
|
BTW, the 2A only protected the states and individuals from the Feds. The states, however, could disarm anyone they wished and did so with freed slaves.
Yes, but that may change with Nordyke setting some precedent. I suspect the USSC will have to take up incorporation at some point in time. If we've already got the looney 9th Circuit on board with incorporation of the Second, I like our chances with other circuit courts and the USSC. Still, nothing is for sure when dealing with our court systems.
__________________
"If you love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen." Samuel Adams. |
April 28, 2009, 10:30 PM | #75 | |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,660
|
Quote:
I hazard to say that the question has been answered. The current diversion over a clause that is now disconnected from the individual right to keep and bear arms is nothing more than venting, because some want to make the militia more important than it has been in over a hundred years. Remember, the prefatory clause stated a reason to enumerate a right of the people. The clause did not state all the reasons, anymore than the BOR enumerates all of our rights (Hamiltons fear). |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|