DemocRAT Scum Attempt to Steal the House Has Been Deemed Unconstitutional -- Virginia court declares state's redistricting vote was unconstitutional in legal win for Republican

Originally posted by: Kevin Lewis

This is a common misinterpretation of the Second Amendment. The clause that begins the first sentence is a restrictive clause, albeit not in the form one usually sees it. 

 

Gun lovers have, for decades, interpreted the Amendment to mean blanket permission, carte blanche, for anybody and everybody to own AND BRANDISH big guns, small guns, rocket launchers, nuclear weapons, etc. That's neither the intention nor the language of the Amendment.


I know you're intentionally being a bit hyperbolic but it doesn't include all of the weapons you listed as some are not defensive arms. That is a bit of a straw man. 

 

It definitely does not include the right to brandish. Unless you have a completely different definition than what I understand.

 

I believe the framers intended it as a right to all individuals to own and train in the use of weapons in defense of themselves, their land,  and their state, and to form or organize groups to the same end.

 

The people were the militia, and the militia were the people.

 

Part of the idea is to have everyone familiar enough with the use of arms so that if the need arises they could join an organized militia or if one was formed, an army. 

 

 

Originally posted by: Mark

You are overlooking the requirement in the 2nd amendment that in order for the 2nd amendment to apply the militia has to be "well regulated" to qualify. It cannot be some informal thing say every male over a certain age.

 

 


I read no such requirements in the text. 

 

Well regulated is in well functioning, well trained, well performing etc. as in familiar with the use and function of arms. 

 

A well regulated militia being necessary for the security of a free state. (This is the prefatory clause) 

 

The right of the people to keep in bear arms shall not be infringed. (This is the operative clause) 

 

It is basically saying. "Hey we all know that a well regulated militia (an armed citizenry) is necessary. So because of that we can't prohibit citizens from owning and training in the use of arms. 

 

 

Originally posted by: LiveFreeNW

You mean the preferatory clause?

 

It isn't saying that the right is only for militias. 

 

Even if it did, you may want to familiarize yourself with the definition of militia. 

 

During the framing of the Constitution pretty much every state had a statutory definition of militia that included every able-bodied male 17 and over.  The first federal statutes basically defined militia as any male citizen or individual who has declared an intention to become a citizen within the U.S. Early definitions restrict militia to men but the 14th amendment would have extended this to women

 

 


"Well regulated". 

Thanks for various viewpoints.


Originally posted by: LiveFreeNW

I know you're intentionally being a bit hyperbolic but it doesn't include all of the weapons you listed as some are not defensive arms. That is a bit of a straw man. 

 

It definitely does not include the right to brandish. Unless you have a completely different definition than what I understand.

 

I believe the framers intended it as a right to all individuals to own and train in the use of weapons in defense of themselves, their land,  and their state, and to form or organize groups to the same end.

 

The people were the militia, and the militia were the people.

 

Part of the idea is to have everyone familiar enough with the use of arms so that if the need arises they could join an organized militia or if one was formed, an army. 

 

 


The Amendment makes no distinction re "defensive" arms. And what is a defensive weapon anyway? A shield, maybe? Something that shoots down missiles? 

 

I disagree re "brandish." What else would 'bear" in "keep and bear arms" mean?

 

In any event, I was referring to how conservatives interpret the Amendment, which is different from its actual language. Obviously, the intent was to make it possible for an armed and trained militia to be mustered at short notice.

 

I and other scholars therefore interpret the Amendment quite strictly. You're entitled to keep and bear arms as a member of a militia. Not in any other function or capacity. Not to hold up a liquor store. Not to shoot your annoying neighbor. Not to hunt rabbits. Not to engage in a duel.

 

Obviously, broader permissions can be enacted at various levels of government, but the Amendment ONLY refers to the right to equip oneself to serve in a militia.

Already a LVA subscriber?
To continue reading, choose an option below:
Diamond Membership
$3 per month
Unlimited access to LVA website
Exclusive subscriber-only content
Limited Member Rewards Online
Join Now
or
Platinum Membership
$50 per year
Unlimited access to LVA website
Exclusive subscriber-only content
Exclusive Member Rewards Book
Join Now