I discovered that the answer to question of how the 2nd Amendment should be interpreted is set out very clearly by Alexander Hamilton (the Founder) in Federalist #29 (1789).
The 2nd Amendment says....
"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."
To understand what Alexander Hamilton and other crucial Founders like George Washington were talking about in the 2nd Amendment, you will need to imagine that you are back in the America of 1789 - and try to get yourself inside a Founder's head !
Firstly the Revolutionary War is a very fresh memory, and the memory of this war would include a very distinct suspicion of standing armies as a tool of tyranny. In the 'Declaration of Independenc' (1776), there are over half a dozen examples that warned of the threat to liberty of a standing army.
So, the Founders, worried that a standing army could become a tool of some future tyrant, created a system of "checks and balances" to thwart a Federal army from ever threatening the liberties of American citizens.
Their solution was a "WELL - REGULATED MILITIA."
In 1789, the term "MILITIA" did NOT refer to a self-appointed force of citizens in camo running around in the woods with rifles. "Blow-Hole" Joe Biden - if I can diverge for a second - however, thinks that this is, indeed, the case in America today; namely, that there are White Supremacists in control of "ULTRA-MAGA" militia networks organised throughout "fly-over country," whose members are busy running about 24/7 training with AR-15 rifles so they can mount an insurrection to re-install Donald Trump as POTUS !! To continue. What Hamilton and the other key Founders - like Thomas Madison and George Washington, for example, meant by the term "a well-regulated militia" is that militias would be raised by each state government in the republic Hamilton explains in Federalist #29 (1789), that their loyalty and devotion to the new American republic was assured by the fact they would be defending their families, their neighbours and their homes. (And) because they might someday have to operate as a combined force, the militias were to be "WELL-REGULATED" - that meant trained to standards set by the federal government.
I'll give you an example of a modern-day militia of the kind that Hamilton was referring to taken from Australia. In Australia we have a standing army, that is a professional, regular army comprised of full-time. There is also a civilian militia called the Australian Army Reserves. The Army Reserves are everyday citizens who are not full-time, professional soldiers, they could be:electricians, teachers, businessmen, truck-drivers, doctors,, gardeners, architects - just about any occupation you could name. Provided they meet the age and health criteria set, they can sign on to be a Reservist. A Reservist might sign-on for one or two (sometimes more) days a week of duty. A lot of guy devote Saturday and/or Sunday to being in the Australian Army Reserve. When they join the Army reserve, they are given military training by member of the regular Australian standing/professional army. They are taught how to use the different firearms the Australian Army uses, how to set mines, use rocket-propelled grenades, fire SAM missiles, as well as military communication and surveillance techniques and so on and on and on. These Reservist are pretty much what the Founder had in mind when they were referring to a millitia. For instance I could join my local Australian Army Reserve, if I did I would be joining my local "well-regulated militia" in the state of Australia in which I live (which is Queensland).
The idea of the Army Reserves is for the Federal Government to train civilians up to the stands set by the Australian standing (professional) Army, so that if ever the shit hits the fan and Australia is suddenly invaded by an army of bellicose hairy-assed Islamists (running amok through Sydney waving their swords and shouting: " Allah u Akbar{/B] - kill the Whitey" !!) , or some other species of blood-thirsty Darkies, the Reserves (militiamen) are ready to swing into action and support the regular Australian Army in the fight.
OK, so, getting back to America and the 2nd Amendment. I've explained what a militia is. In the case of the Second Amendment each state was to have its own militia or citizens army who were trained according to uniform military stands set by the Federal government. The Federal government was envisaged as having a relatively small standing army, because, as I mentioned, the Founders didn't trust governments with large standing armies (for a number of reasons) Again, put yourself in the mind of an American Founder in 1789...You are directly invested in a great experiment in liberal democracy and republican government. As a 'republic" everything the state did was a public thing - including defence, and liberal democracies rely on FREE INSTITUTIONS to protect rights. So you will have to see that the potential power of the federal government - including a standing army - is offset by the power of a militia under the authority of the states that made up the union.
It wasn't that ONE MAN with a gun would stop tyranny, it was that the free association of citizens organized in state government militias would act as a bulwark against the power of central government. In this context, the 2nd Amendment WAS NOT ABOUT AN INDIVIDUAL'S RIGHT TO POSSESS ARD BEAR ARMS, IT WAS ABOUT PREVENTING THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FROM INTERFERING IN THE ABILITY OF THE INDIVIDUAL STATES TO ESTABLISH "WELL-ORGANISED MILITIA" and in so doing protect liberty. It seems the Founders believed the states' militia could meet the needs of national defence, while also balancing the potential tyrannical power of a LARGE standing army.
So there you go. The 2nd Amendment does give you the right to possess and bear armsBUT NOT FOR INDIVIDUAL SELF DEFENCE, NOR FOR TARGET-SHOOTING, NOR FOR HUNTING, NOR BECAUSE YOU THINK OWNING AN AR-15 COOL AND WILL IMPRESS YOUR FRIENDS, NOR FOR VIGILANTISM and so on. The Founder were focussed on a much bigger picture, and arguably they should have put a bit more effort into making their intentions in the 2nd Amendment much clearer. Nonetheless if you cross-reference the thoughts of the various Founders who addressed this issue it's crystal clear that the 2nd Amendment had nothing to do with anything but the establishment of "well-regulated" state militia - citizen armies for which citizens would need ready access to a firearm. THAT'S WHY the 2nd Amendment gave individual citizens "the right to keep and bear arms."
It amazes me hoe clever the Founders were. But like any human beings they could not see into the future. I think they kind of took it for granted that America would always remain a White (European) Protestant nation, and if it had everything would have been sweet. They never imaginged an ass-hole like Lyndon Baines Johnson would fill America with coloured Third World peasant, or that communists would seize power in 2021 and open the nations's borders to literally any undesirables/criminals/perverts/terrorists who wanted to walk into America NO QUESTIONS ASKED. They would never have imagined something like a "President" "Blow-Hole" Joe Biden in their wildest nightmares. Maybe if they could see America's Blue State cities today, the Founders would say: "Yes, every individual American citizen has the right to own and bear arms because there are so many dangerous screwballs and crazy f**k - wits at large (meth-heads, psychopaths, violent psychotics, low IQ/low impulse-control Blacks, etc; you absolutely need a firearm for defending yourself.."
???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Dachshund - the Wonder Hound
DLM ....Dachshund Lives Matter !!
The 2nd Amendment says....
"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."
To understand what Alexander Hamilton and other crucial Founders like George Washington were talking about in the 2nd Amendment, you will need to imagine that you are back in the America of 1789 - and try to get yourself inside a Founder's head !
Firstly the Revolutionary War is a very fresh memory, and the memory of this war would include a very distinct suspicion of standing armies as a tool of tyranny. In the 'Declaration of Independenc' (1776), there are over half a dozen examples that warned of the threat to liberty of a standing army.
So, the Founders, worried that a standing army could become a tool of some future tyrant, created a system of "checks and balances" to thwart a Federal army from ever threatening the liberties of American citizens.
Their solution was a "WELL - REGULATED MILITIA."
In 1789, the term "MILITIA" did NOT refer to a self-appointed force of citizens in camo running around in the woods with rifles. "Blow-Hole" Joe Biden - if I can diverge for a second - however, thinks that this is, indeed, the case in America today; namely, that there are White Supremacists in control of "ULTRA-MAGA" militia networks organised throughout "fly-over country," whose members are busy running about 24/7 training with AR-15 rifles so they can mount an insurrection to re-install Donald Trump as POTUS !! To continue. What Hamilton and the other key Founders - like Thomas Madison and George Washington, for example, meant by the term "a well-regulated militia" is that militias would be raised by each state government in the republic Hamilton explains in Federalist #29 (1789), that their loyalty and devotion to the new American republic was assured by the fact they would be defending their families, their neighbours and their homes. (And) because they might someday have to operate as a combined force, the militias were to be "WELL-REGULATED" - that meant trained to standards set by the federal government.
I'll give you an example of a modern-day militia of the kind that Hamilton was referring to taken from Australia. In Australia we have a standing army, that is a professional, regular army comprised of full-time. There is also a civilian militia called the Australian Army Reserves. The Army Reserves are everyday citizens who are not full-time, professional soldiers, they could be:electricians, teachers, businessmen, truck-drivers, doctors,, gardeners, architects - just about any occupation you could name. Provided they meet the age and health criteria set, they can sign on to be a Reservist. A Reservist might sign-on for one or two (sometimes more) days a week of duty. A lot of guy devote Saturday and/or Sunday to being in the Australian Army Reserve. When they join the Army reserve, they are given military training by member of the regular Australian standing/professional army. They are taught how to use the different firearms the Australian Army uses, how to set mines, use rocket-propelled grenades, fire SAM missiles, as well as military communication and surveillance techniques and so on and on and on. These Reservist are pretty much what the Founder had in mind when they were referring to a millitia. For instance I could join my local Australian Army Reserve, if I did I would be joining my local "well-regulated militia" in the state of Australia in which I live (which is Queensland).
The idea of the Army Reserves is for the Federal Government to train civilians up to the stands set by the Australian standing (professional) Army, so that if ever the shit hits the fan and Australia is suddenly invaded by an army of bellicose hairy-assed Islamists (running amok through Sydney waving their swords and shouting: " Allah u Akbar{/B] - kill the Whitey" !!) , or some other species of blood-thirsty Darkies, the Reserves (militiamen) are ready to swing into action and support the regular Australian Army in the fight.
OK, so, getting back to America and the 2nd Amendment. I've explained what a militia is. In the case of the Second Amendment each state was to have its own militia or citizens army who were trained according to uniform military stands set by the Federal government. The Federal government was envisaged as having a relatively small standing army, because, as I mentioned, the Founders didn't trust governments with large standing armies (for a number of reasons) Again, put yourself in the mind of an American Founder in 1789...You are directly invested in a great experiment in liberal democracy and republican government. As a 'republic" everything the state did was a public thing - including defence, and liberal democracies rely on FREE INSTITUTIONS to protect rights. So you will have to see that the potential power of the federal government - including a standing army - is offset by the power of a militia under the authority of the states that made up the union.
It wasn't that ONE MAN with a gun would stop tyranny, it was that the free association of citizens organized in state government militias would act as a bulwark against the power of central government. In this context, the 2nd Amendment WAS NOT ABOUT AN INDIVIDUAL'S RIGHT TO POSSESS ARD BEAR ARMS, IT WAS ABOUT PREVENTING THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FROM INTERFERING IN THE ABILITY OF THE INDIVIDUAL STATES TO ESTABLISH "WELL-ORGANISED MILITIA" and in so doing protect liberty. It seems the Founders believed the states' militia could meet the needs of national defence, while also balancing the potential tyrannical power of a LARGE standing army.
So there you go. The 2nd Amendment does give you the right to possess and bear armsBUT NOT FOR INDIVIDUAL SELF DEFENCE, NOR FOR TARGET-SHOOTING, NOR FOR HUNTING, NOR BECAUSE YOU THINK OWNING AN AR-15 COOL AND WILL IMPRESS YOUR FRIENDS, NOR FOR VIGILANTISM and so on. The Founder were focussed on a much bigger picture, and arguably they should have put a bit more effort into making their intentions in the 2nd Amendment much clearer. Nonetheless if you cross-reference the thoughts of the various Founders who addressed this issue it's crystal clear that the 2nd Amendment had nothing to do with anything but the establishment of "well-regulated" state militia - citizen armies for which citizens would need ready access to a firearm. THAT'S WHY the 2nd Amendment gave individual citizens "the right to keep and bear arms."
It amazes me hoe clever the Founders were. But like any human beings they could not see into the future. I think they kind of took it for granted that America would always remain a White (European) Protestant nation, and if it had everything would have been sweet. They never imaginged an ass-hole like Lyndon Baines Johnson would fill America with coloured Third World peasant, or that communists would seize power in 2021 and open the nations's borders to literally any undesirables/criminals/perverts/terrorists who wanted to walk into America NO QUESTIONS ASKED. They would never have imagined something like a "President" "Blow-Hole" Joe Biden in their wildest nightmares. Maybe if they could see America's Blue State cities today, the Founders would say: "Yes, every individual American citizen has the right to own and bear arms because there are so many dangerous screwballs and crazy f**k - wits at large (meth-heads, psychopaths, violent psychotics, low IQ/low impulse-control Blacks, etc; you absolutely need a firearm for defending yourself.."
???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Dachshund - the Wonder Hound
DLM ....Dachshund Lives Matter !!
Last edited:
