Gun Owners Only! "Reasonable Gun Law Reform" survey

[neomage2021]

Oh i see. You're retarded. See, when that was written the people WERE the militia, so their right to bear arms was a necessity for there to even be a peoples militia. The Militia was the entire friggen point of the second amendment.

NO it wasn't. Read the following carefully. It's 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"

The first part of that statement is in contrast to the second part. A well regulated militia is needed to defend the country. Yes we need a standing army, BUT the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. "The people" is in direct contrast with the militia.

Why? because we had just fought a war against a tyrannical government to gain our freedom. The founding fathers believed the people should have the right to be armed in case government became tyrannical once more, to repel invasion, and as a means to facilitate self defense.

 

[Roaming East]

NO it wasn't. Read the following carefully. It's 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"

The first part of that statement is in contrast to the second part. A well regulated militia is needed to defend the country. Yes we need a standing army, BUT the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. "The people" is in direct contrast with the militia.

Why? because we had just fought a war against a tyrannical government to gain our freedom. The founding fathers believed the people should have the right to be armed in case government became tyrannical once more, to repel invasion, and as a means to facilitate self defense.

And you're still a retard. The Second Amendment was written in 1791. The Continental Army, the only standing Army the US had BEFORE the regular army came into being in 1796 was DISBANDED following the Treaty of Paris. This means that between the 1783 and 1796 there was no standing army to even compare the militia to. The ENTIRETY of the US defensive force was the call up of civilian militia on a per state basis as regulated under the Militia act of 1792.

The People and the militia are the same. They HAD to be. I dont even know why you are arguing that point

 

[neomage2021]

The People and the militia are the same. They HAD to be. I dont even know why you are arguing that point

It's obvious from previous drafts of the 2nd amendment as well as the 2nd amendment itself that the militia clause is prefactory to the the people clause.

I could go on with many many pieces of evidence from the debates and the drafts of the 2nd amendment, but the argument can easily be summed up as with these questions.

Tell me where ANYWHERE else in the constitution or the bill of rights does the phrase "the people" refer to anything other than the rights of an individual?

Why then if the writers of the constitution and bill of rights rights were so careful with their wording would they change who they were referring to as "the people" for only one single statement?


Nice try scooter, but the overwhelming number of scholarly papers, evidence, and court rulings on the subject are against you.

 

[jericksen5]

I find it hilarious when gun control advocates argue over the wording of the 2nd amendment, as if it is the only statement the founding fathers gave regarding gun ownership. There are literally hundreds of quotes from the founding fathers on the issue of gun control.

"The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms."
~ Samual Adams