2nd amendment discussion,

[rubbertramp]

i'm having one with a friend who's anti gun. in your opinion, does the second amendment "require" americans to arm themselves, or just point out that they may if they want to?
i'm not interested in gun control legislation, or the butchering of the constitution by laws like the patriot ace or hr1955.

[Real Truth]

if you want to have a gun noone can say you can't unless your a convicted mass murder or something bad like that. You don't have to get one but you can if you want

[rubbertramp]

then a well regulated militia is not a requirment?

[Kregener]

It does not 'require' you to have one.

But every able-bodied man SHOULD have one, and know how to use it.

[Aerioch]

http://www.cafepress.com/pissofftheleft.55896883

Very wise words, from very evil people who sought total control.

[rubbertramp]

http://www.cafepress.com/pissofftheleft.55896883

Very wise words, from very evil people who sought total control.

i was having trouble reading the brint.

this should work.

[Geolibertarian]

i'm having one with a friend who's anti gun. in your opinion, does the second amendment "require" americans to arm themselves, or just point out that they may if they want to?

Have you read the following?

• http://guncite.com/gc2ndpur.html
• http://guncite.com/gc2ndmea.html
• http://guncite.com/gc2ndsup.html

[Overcast]

I think it requires the states to maintain a militia and also guarantees the right of people to protect themselves as well.

But I do not think it's meaning was to require any certain person to own a gun.

[Kregener]

I think it requires the states to maintain a militia...

No, it does not.

Sorry, the USC was...'created'...in 1926. It was the Revised Statutes before that. Since the National Guard was not created until 1903, when the Federal Behemoth federalized the militia, I can only assume this 'Title 10' with all its 'subtitles and 'chapters' came after that.

This 'statute':

(b) The classes of the militia are -

'Defines' militia as FEDERALIZED TROOPS:

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

And is followed by deliberate psycho-babble:

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

Was, not was. Don't leave before you get here, or you might not be here when you get back...

"Militia", as it was used when the Constitution was written, meant all able-bodied men. Period. End of note. No song and dance.

The 2nd Amendment really is written in pretty plain language as it is, it is just the language of the day.

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.

Let us examine:

"A well regulated"

Regulated in that day meant equipped, outfitted, NOT legislated, controlled, and federally supervised, as it does today.

"militia"

All men of arms-carrying and fighting age and ability, all able-bodied men, NOT the National Guard, which was not created until 1903, or Federal Troops.

"being necessary to the security of a free state"

As in; needed to ensure a state of liberty, NOT needed BY the State to carry out its orders or agenda. (capital S)

"the right

Right, as in; freedom, NOT privilege.

of the people"

People, as in; YOU and ME, and your uncle, and your brother and your neighbor down the street, NOT (again) federalized citizens obedient to the State.


"to keep and bear arms"

Possess and freely walk about with the weapons of their choice, NOT certain unthreatening guns locked in a safe with cables running through the action, and can only be carried in certain places.

"shall not be infringed."

Cannot be legislated, curtailed, outlawed, tampered with, or impeded in any way, NOT occasionally legislated to suit some agenda.

So let us recap:

Intent:

"Well-equipped persons of arms carrying, fighting ability and age being needed to ensure a state of liberty, the freedom to possess and walk about with the arms of their choice, cannot be legislated, curtailed, outlawed, tampered with, or impeded in any way."

Modern interpretation used today:

"Legislated, controlled, supervised National Guard or Federal Troops, being needed BY the State, the privilege of having certain unthreatening guns locked in a safe with cables running through the action, will occasionally be legislated to suit some agenda."

The "Founders" were pretty smart dudes.

On the other hand, "Politicians" over the last 80 years are Constitutional subversives and minions, both willing and unwilling, of the evil plan to subjugate the world.

[rubbertramp]

kregener, thank you for taking the time to post that. as a guy who always struggled with reading legaleze, i've always hoped the founding fathers were requiring self defense against gov. etc.like myself, i think most like above never really understood,  but just assumed.

[JTCoyoté]

The Second Amendment was specifically aimed at the federal power... The fed can raise an army from the people... the militia... for a period of no longer than two years, to fight a specific war... and must be renewed by act of Congress every two years if the war continues for longer than that period.

This is the reason why since World War I, the president utilizing Congress has declared war every two years on something... First, came the war on the Emergency... the Depression, in 1933, the war on crime in 1935, and again in '37 and '39... then we had World War II.

From 1947 on, there have been various wars including the always looming Cold War until 1989-91... there was the war on poverty, the war on drugs, and so on... this is the only way that the federal government has been able to maintain a standing army... the dreaded and terminal enemy of Liberty.

The federalization of the militia through the Dick Act in 1905, was totally unconstitutional... If you read the preamble of the Bill of Rights you will quickly notice that these rights are not granted to the federal power... they are specifically for and protected to the states and the people.

Think of the Constitution as a contract, which is exactly what it is, it creates the federal government through an act of the several states and the people... it grants specific powers as spelled out clearly in the Constitution... but in order that there be no misconstruction as to the limits of this federal power... it must be remembered that the ratification of the Constitution by three quarters of the states, required that a Bill of Rights be added, or the Constitution would've never been ratified. Here is the preamble of the Bill of Rights, this is the enabling clause, and spells out exactly what the purpose of the Bill of Rights is.

"THE Conventions of a number of the States having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution."

The Second Amendment begins by stating an obvious fact... if a state wishes to remain free it must have a well regulated militia. The word "state" is purposeful... it didn't say Federation, or nation... it says "State"... the obvious meaning of the word can be construed correctly when one understands the meaning of the words The United States... in the amendment itself the word "state" is singular.

"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State..."

The word militia, means armed people... in other words the militia is made up of the people, this is further defined in the militia act of 1792... which was later repealed, because it restricted the age and gender of who would qualify... it restricted the meaning of the word people... there is no restriction or room for restriction of the meaning of the word people in the amendment itself...

"...the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

 The federal government was created to fill a specific need, to represent, protect and defend on the world stage, the Constitution of our free States and people... The Bill of Rights was/is the specifics that absolutely must not be infringed upon by the federal government...

When the federal government goes beyond the specifics of its power as laid out in the Constitution, it has become rogue against the people and the states... Thus the Founders inserted the 9th and 10th Amendments as the absolute method in law, short of arms, to be used by the states, to corral and de-horn a rogue federal government.

--Oldyoti

"The NRA, behind the scenes, has brokered, compromised,
and then endorsed every major anti Second Amendment
federal law passed for the last 30 years..."
C.E. Lovell, NRA Board Member 1980-93

[chris jones]

-

It is my understanding that the Gov. or ditatorship has attempted to alter laws in this regard. To initiate bills etc. Have I been hearing lies or is this a fact.
OK.
We are entilted to bear arms, thats it, it is constitutional and can not be messed with.
If one day the our masters decide to change that law, and I wouldn't put it past them, to infringe upon our rights to include this, its time to use them.
I have heard it said Veterans can not have concealed weapons, or that this bill was put before our loving congress, or am I flipping out here.

[Geolibertarian]

When the federal government goes beyond the specifics of its power as laid out in the Constitution, it has become rogue against the people and the states... Thus the Founders inserted the 9th and 10th Amendments as the absolute method in law, short of arms, to be used by the states, to corral and de-horn a rogue federal government.

Agreed. But when you have a general public that--thanks to compulsory government schooling--don't even know how many articles there are in the Bill of Rights, let alone what rights they protect or government powers they restrict, those Amendments may as well not exist.

That's why it's so important to remind the masses of the rights and protections they already have under the Constitution, so that they might know when the government is overstepping its bounds not just morally and ethically, but legally.

[rubbertramp]

While we're at it. the 13th always confused me a bit..........

http://www.loc.gov/rr/program/bib/ourdocs/13thamendment.html

[2Revolutions]

thanks for breaking it down kregener.  These is the reason why there no sensible "gun control laws".  

[plantop14]

thanks for breaking it down kregener.  These is the reason why there no sensible "gun control laws".  

bump, well done kreg!

[JTCoyoté]

While we're at it. the 13th always confused me a bit..........

http://www.loc.gov/rr/program/bib/ourdocs/13thamendment.html

What you speak of here, is actually in the 14th amendment that Lincoln was working on when he was killed... That period in American history was the age of royalist/banker/globalist's subterfuge, obfuscation, and co-opting... Here is the fully ratified, REAL 13th Amendment... Ratified by the requisite 13 States, by Virginia's adopting it in March of 1819...

"If any citizen of the United States shall accept, claim, receive, or retain any title of nobility or honour, or shall without the consent of Congress, accept and retain any present, pension, office, or emolument of any kind whatever, from any emperor, king, prince, or foreign power, such person shall cease to be a citizen of the United States, and shall be incapable of holding any office of trust or profit under them, or either of them." [Journal of the Senate]

www.amendment-13.org/

Coyoté

"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people,
except for few public officials."
~George Mason,
3 Elliot, Debates at 425-426