Current Topics
Voters
by chunkstyle
Yesterday at 11:24 PM
Kavanaugh and the FBI
by rporter314
Yesterday at 11:22 PM
The Midterms
by Jeffery J. Haas
Yesterday at 11:14 PM
The Passing Parade: Obituaries: 2018
by Golem
Yesterday at 04:19 PM
Miscellaneous humor thread
by Golem
10/19/18 06:18 PM
The chosen one?
by pondering_it_all
10/19/18 05:04 AM
Roundtable for October 2018
by pondering_it_all
10/19/18 04:58 AM
What Left?
by Greger
10/19/18 03:18 AM
Debt Crises
by jgw
10/18/18 09:39 PM
The Magic of Biochar
by Greger
10/13/18 07:08 PM
The Blindness of Good intentions
by jgw
10/09/18 09:26 PM
Trump’s ‘New’ Can-Mex Trade Deal Has All Kinds Of Improvements? Thanks, Obama
by jgw
10/09/18 05:35 PM
The End of the Independent Judiciary
by pdx rick
10/07/18 02:55 PM
Tiny Hawaiian Gecko Accidentally Calls 'a Bazillion' People from Hospital Phone,
by Greger
10/07/18 01:09 AM
That Bombshell Report on Trump's Taxes May Spark an Investigation by New York
by Jeffery J. Haas
10/05/18 05:03 AM
A time when politics were not all about greed
by jgw
10/04/18 07:28 PM
George Will: Abolish the death penalty
by Greger
10/03/18 12:28 AM
if the Dems take over
by Greger
10/01/18 09:55 PM
Answer (Fredric Brown, 1954)
by jgw
09/28/18 06:24 PM
RoundTable for September 2018
by NW Ponderer
09/28/18 11:24 AM
Forum Stats
6248 Members
58 Forums
16401 Topics
282390 Posts

Max Online: 294 @ 12/06/17 12:57 AM
Google Adsense
Page 1 of 2 1 2 >
Topic Options
#305727 - 02/23/18 07:58 PM The second amendment revisited.
jgw Offline
enthusiast

Registered: 05/22/06
Posts: 2143
Loc: Port Angeles, WA
The second amendment is VERY short:
"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."

This is the ratified and signed version of the amendment. There are a number of others but THIS ONE is the one, again, ratified and signed.

I just do not get it. It starts: "A well regulated Militia". My question was, and remains, what in the HELL does that mean. Obviously the supremes figured it out - they simply ignored it! The result seems to be, seemingly, a bifurcation of the United states of America! For anybody to say that they constitutional congress meant this to happen just doesn't make sense.

Most of the discussion and blather is about the word "militia" and, as far as I am concerned that makes no difference and simply clouds the issue. So, lets just say it means 'adults' and let it go.

I have no idea if this actually makes any sense. If you google "a well regulated militia" you will get over 4 MILLION hits! In other words this one has been seriously considered and picked apart big time. However, that being said, common sense would tend to make "a well regulated militia" say that those that own guns should be WELL REGULATION by gov. I can't see any other definition of the phrase. This, to me, means that gov is simply not doing its job as there are few, if any, real regulations in place or, if they are, they are the very definition of scofflaw.

Anyway, that's my take on it. Given the present situations wherein there is a lot yelling and screaming I suspect its time to go back to the source and make another run at it. Once that gets decided maybe we can figure out why we still have a president that has adamantly, and continuously refused to protect the nation against a foreign power (Russia) which continuously hammers us digitally at every opportunity.

Top
#305730 - 02/23/18 08:41 PM Re: The second amendment revisited. [Re: jgw]
pondering_it_all Offline
veteran

Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 7934
Loc: North San Diego County
I think "well-regulated militia" means exactly what it says: A government-led armed force with a defined command structure. It already exists as the National Guard. It carries out the needs of government for security, disaster response, and such.

The 2nd Amendment was passed because the feds tried to call up the militia to suppress an insurrection and a bunch of farmers showed up with hoes and shovels. It was NEVER about being ready to fight the government. It was about fighting insurrections! So gun-nuts claiming the 2nd Amendment means they need to be ready to fight the government are simply making shite up.

Top
#305731 - 02/23/18 09:07 PM Re: The second amendment revisited. [Re: jgw]
logtroll Offline
veteran

Registered: 04/26/10
Posts: 8892
Loc: New Mexico (not old Mexico)
There are several more references to the militia in the Constitution, which I think make matters pretty clear:
Quote:
Congress shall have the power ... 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, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress

US Constitution, article 1, section 8, clause 15


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; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

US Constitution, article II, section 2, clause 1
_________________________
"You can't fix a problem until you understand what the problem is." Logtroll

Top
#305733 - 02/23/18 10:24 PM Re: The second amendment revisited. [Re: jgw]
NW Ponderer Online   content
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 16236
At the time of the adoption of the Second Amendment, most States had specific requirements for militia members (adults between 18 and 60) to provide their OWN personal arms (a musket of a particular caliber, balls and powder, and a sword or bayonet) when called to militia service. If they chose not to keep them at home, militia members were allowed to store them in the armory. It was such an armory that was the target of British troops in Concord and Lexington.
_________________________
A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.

Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich

Top
#305735 - 02/24/18 01:39 AM Re: The second amendment revisited. [Re: jgw]
rporter314 Online   content
old hand

Registered: 03/18/03
Posts: 6528
Loc: Highlands, Tx
Quote:
I just do not get it

context is everything

when the Constitution was ratified the federal government had no standing army. they had a standing navy ... they had an army officer corps, but no soldiers. remember the standing army thing with the british? this problem was solved during Pres Washingtons term

so when we the people make the contract with the creation of the federal government, it is mandated to defend citizens from enemies both foreign and domestic. you have any idea how they were to do that? yup .... state militias. the president would send out order for a military presence i.e. militias, the several states for which the president requested troops would send selected companies of militia. each state was obligated to maintain i.e. well regulated, a military presence by routinely levying citizens into service which consisted of 3 month tours of duty, mostly of parading in county courthouse squares or parade grounds and other duties. each citizen had to provide for own weapon.

the federal government in order to protect itself from the states ability to control guns included the 2nd to prevent states from outlawing guns and thus eliminating the ability of the federal government to fulfill its obligation to defend etc.

so a thought ... could the Founders have included as a substitute for what we have as the 2nd, some different words. how about a provision which says, the several states were required to provide each citizen with armaments for service etc. a couple of things ... in 1903 Congress passed the Dick Act which essentially did just that,however I suspect in 1788 there was a separation of not only branches but of states and federal governments as well as individual and states rights.

history doesn't stand still for people to catch up ... Dylan said it better than I ...
_________________________
ignorance is the enemy
without equality there is no liberty

Top
#305746 - 02/24/18 05:08 PM Re: The second amendment revisited. [Re: jgw]
Ujest Shurly Offline
newbie

Registered: 10/16/16
Posts: 356
Loc: Sterling Heights, MI, USA
Another interesting take on the why and background of the Second Amendment.

The Second Amendment was ratified to preserve slavery hosted on rawstory.com





Edited by Ujest Shurly (02/24/18 05:09 PM)
_________________________
Vote 2018; give meaning and honor to those who made sure you have the right to vote.

Life is like a PB&J sandwich
The older you get, the moldery and crustier you get.

Now, get off my grass!

Top
#305747 - 02/24/18 05:08 PM Re: The second amendment revisited. [Re: jgw]
NW Ponderer Online   content
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 16236
I have read EXTENSIVELY on the history of the Second Amendment. There were elements who supported the interpretation flogged by gun advocates - exclusively in the South and mostly to protect against slave revolts. (These States, of course, had severe restrictions on who could own and carry a gun.) These advocates lost their arguments.

Current gun advocates ignore this reality/history. Most often they misquote the record, usually eliding portions that contradict their view. Antonin Scalia was one of the worst abusers of history in this regard, which is how we got the Heller decision. The "self-defense" mantra was created and favored by the segregationist Southerners after passage of the civil Rights amendments, and co-extended with Jim Crow laws. Yeah, THEY'VE got credibility on their side...

Most people espousing this view are probably unaware of its origin and history.
_________________________
A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.

Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich

Top
#305749 - 02/24/18 08:26 PM Re: The second amendment revisited. [Re: jgw]
rporter314 Online   content
old hand

Registered: 03/18/03
Posts: 6528
Loc: Highlands, Tx
best i can recollect J Stephans minority opinion to J Scalia's majority opinion in Heller, was right on target. Best of my recollection he nailed the history and thinking "correctly" which was more "originalist" than J Scalia's opinion.

inre your thread on reliable etc ... find the facts, read it all and make up your own mind without benefit of someone else's commentary influencing your own conclusions
_________________________
ignorance is the enemy
without equality there is no liberty

Top
#305751 - 02/24/18 08:50 PM Re: The second amendment revisited. [Re: jgw]
jgw Offline
enthusiast

Registered: 05/22/06
Posts: 2143
Loc: Port Angeles, WA
The only part of the second amendment I really do not understand is, basically, the complete ignoring of the "well regulated" phrase, especially on the part of the gun enthusiasts. I also don't understand why those for gun control even give the impression that they are at all interested in what the gun enthusiasts have to say or any argument they might make. The facts are known and its very simple - control the guns and the problems are not completely solved but they are MUCH better than what we have going on. When they start in with their so called second amendment rights I simply do not give them the time of the day - it would be a complete waste of time.

It seems that the United States of America is a place that simply rejects any and all solutions not invented here <sigh>

Top
#305755 - 02/25/18 01:25 AM Re: The second amendment revisited. [Re: jgw]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14285
Loc: Florida
Quote:
The only part of the second amendment I really do not understand is, basically, the complete ignoring of the "well regulated" phrase

I think you'll find that a lot of us are on that boat...
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#305756 - 02/25/18 01:50 AM Re: The second amendment revisited. [Re: jgw]
pondering_it_all Offline
veteran

Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 7934
Loc: North San Diego County
The Supreme Court actually goes along with almost anything a state wants to do regarding guns. I imagine a state could even require all guns to be kept in central government armories, unless the owner wanted to check them out for a hunting trip or target shooting event. Is there a home defense need that is not met by a single pump-action shotgun per adult?

Top
#305766 - 02/25/18 08:27 PM Re: The second amendment revisited. [Re: jgw]
jgw Offline
enthusiast

Registered: 05/22/06
Posts: 2143
Loc: Port Angeles, WA
It would seem, on the face of it, that the Supremes actually do buy into the "well regulated" part of the second amendment and has not ruled against any actual gun regulations, other than those that might deny a citizen the supposed right to own a weapon unless there is reason, such as insanity, a history of violence, etc. It also means that when gov tries to 'regulate' they are well within their right and all the talk about ignoring the second amendment, taking away rights, etc. is just pure unadulterated blather and should be treated as suck.

This morning I watched some of the gun blather on the political shows and it was truly disgusting. All these arguments over the second amendment! NOBODY has suggested taking away a right to bear arms - NOBODY! Its all fear crap coming from the gun manufacturer and repeated by the greedy brain dead intent on getting theirs from the gun manufacturers. I do, however, wonder about the gun manufacturers themselves. They gave something like 33 million to the Lying Jackass and, it would seem, compliant legislators get something between 3 and 6 million each to keep their jobs too. I wonder, just how much profit do these people make? On the face of it they seem to be giving away at least, easily, more than 100 million dollars annually. This is not money raised by due paying NRA members (if you buy a gun you are registered as a member of the NRA and if you choose to not pay your dues you are still a member and will have been sent a card to prove it!). Anyway, on top of that the NRA spends more millions training and 'educating'. Again, how much money do these people make? I think the Remington gun manufacturer, for instance, just went banko! Consider how much money they would have if they weren't giving 100+ million away every year! My suspicion, based on absolutely nothing, tends to make me wonder why they are actually doing what they are doing as it would seem that is actually cutting into their profit!

Perhaps the Dems should press to make sure that claimed NRA membership includes only dues paying members and not those who are claimed to be members simply because they bought a gun. That might be a really good place to start against all these claims? I also think that those who are paying dues should be made aware that they needn't as they would still be a member whether they liked it or not. Again, I suspect that many paying in might be interested to know that they don't need to.

Top
#305773 - 02/26/18 04:50 PM Re: The second amendment revisited. [Re: jgw]
rporter314 Online   content
old hand

Registered: 03/18/03
Posts: 6528
Loc: Highlands, Tx
_________________________
ignorance is the enemy
without equality there is no liberty

Top
#305780 - 02/27/18 01:37 AM Re: The second amendment revisited. [Re: jgw]
Ujest Shurly Offline
newbie

Registered: 10/16/16
Posts: 356
Loc: Sterling Heights, MI, USA
Good article, Thanks
_________________________
Vote 2018; give meaning and honor to those who made sure you have the right to vote.

Life is like a PB&J sandwich
The older you get, the moldery and crustier you get.

Now, get off my grass!

Top
Page 1 of 2 1 2 >

Who's Online
0 registered (), 44 Guests and 1 Spider online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
TrentonP, Nosf50, erumonej, Jensen Breck, Albertapkr
6248 Registered Users
A2