Well Regulated Militia

[domer76]

Actually, they didn't, because several drafts were made and debates took place concerning ratification. Thus, precursors (not just one) were relevant.

The final version is the only one that is relevant.

[domer76]

Where did you get the idea that soldiers that time used only firearms as weapons?

The precursors did not become irrelevant because they became the basis for ratification debates. Read the section after the one you referred to earlier as "nice".

Infringement refers to complete restriction, abridgement to limitations.

Finally, 2A does not refer to a citizen militia.

Where did I say they only carried firearms. But, in that regard, you are truly trying to stretch the 2nd to refer to swords. Especially in the context of its application today.

The only amendment that is relevant is the ratified version.

Infringement does not mean complete restriction. It means to limit, just as your synomym does.

The 2A does not specifically refer to a “citizen” militia. It merely refers to a militia. Was there a different militia than a citizen militia at the time? Do you wish to argue the difference between a standing army versus a militia at that time? If you do, you’ll be contradicting one of your earlier posts.

[USFREEDOM911]

That's right. Now, study the subsequent Militia Acts. This time, you will have to find them online and read them.

All your attempts are accomplishing nothing; because 2A states that the right shall not be infringed and the SC has overruled several attempts by those trying to do so.

[USFREEDOM911]

Trolling.

Mocking and laughing at you, is not trolling; but you might just want to reread the rules, regarding this, if you failed to do so when signing on to the board.

11. No Posing. Definition: Creating a "troll" account that matches another user's account. These accounts will be banned, leaving your other account open. Unless it was done for the purpose of intimidation, you will likely lose permanently all access to the site if such is the case.

14. The treatment of Incendiary Troll accounts. Definition: Posting solely for reaction, to harass, or stalk. Whether single or secondary, those accounts posting solely for reaction and/or harassment and not contributing to the discussion in any way post at the sole discretion of the JPP Admin Team and may be removed at any moment.

[ralfy]

The final version is the only one that is relevant.

The point is understanding the intent of the final version. To do that, you need to see how it was drafted, the debates surrounding revisions, and how it became operational. You failed to do that, which explains your simplistic and wrong view of 2A and your inability to understand simple concepts, i.e., they are too "abstract" for you.

[ralfy]

Where did I say they only carried firearms. But, in that regard, you are truly trying to stretch the 2nd to refer to swords. Especially in the context of its application today.

The only amendment that is relevant is the ratified version.

Infringement does not mean complete restriction. It means to limit, just as your synomym does.

The 2A does not specifically refer to a “citizen” militia. It merely refers to a militia. Was there a different militia than a citizen militia at the time? Do you wish to argue the difference between a standing army versus a militia at that time? If you do, you’ll be contradicting one of your earlier posts.

You were referring to rocks, knives, and forks, which I did not even mention. Now, you imply in your first sentence that you did not mean only firearms, and yet in your next can't imagine soldiers using anything other than that. You can't even get your story straight.

You also can't follow my argument. The purpose of showing that there are earlier drafts and that debates surrounded revision is not to show that earlier versions matter but that your claim that 2A is simply about the right to bear arms is wrong. Do I have to explain that to you?

Infringement means a violation of a rule. That means when you infringe on the right to bear arms you don't allow it at all. In contrast, abridgment refers to limitations on the rule. Why is this point important? Because the right to bear arms was influenced by English common law, which in based on the NATURAL right to defend oneself. "Natural" means the right to defend oneself is FUNDAMENTAL, i.e., it takes place even WITHOUT a government, a Constitution, or 2A. That's why 2A DOESN'T GRANT the right to bear arms to citizens but PROTECTS it. That's because the right PREDATES 2A.

Does that mean that the right is inviolable in all circumstances? No. That's why, for example, citizens who are convicted and imprisoned are not allowed to bear arms. Fundamental rights cannot be infringed but may be abridged. The problem is that several confuse the two, thinking that a gun ban or gun control goes against 2A. It doesn't because rights may be limited. Given that, do you now understand the concept of a natural right and how it can be abridged?

First, you refer to a citizen militia, and now you contradict yourself by claiming that it merely refers to a militia. Even your second point is wrong! It doesn't merely refer to a militia. Do I need to explain that to you as well?

You don't even know that before 2A states had militias operating as slave patrols, among others? As for your last point, didn't I explain that in my earlier post?

[ralfy]

All your attempts are accomplishing nothing; because 2A states that the right shall not be infringed and the SC has overruled several attempts by those trying to do so.

But I didn't claim otherwise! I'm talking about the first half of 2A, which is the topic of this thread.

You're not paying attention.

[ralfy]

Mocking and laughing at you, is not trolling; but you might just want to reread the rules, regarding this, if you failed to do so when signing on to the board.

11. No Posing. Definition: Creating a "troll" account that matches another user's account. These accounts will be banned, leaving your other account open. Unless it was done for the purpose of intimidation, you will likely lose permanently all access to the site if such is the case.

14. The treatment of Incendiary Troll accounts. Definition: Posting solely for reaction, to harass, or stalk. Whether single or secondary, those accounts posting solely for reaction and/or harassment and not contributing to the discussion in any way post at the sole discretion of the JPP Admin Team and may be removed at any moment.

I don't see the difference between trolling using a new account or an old one for logical reasons.

[USFREEDOM911]

But I didn't claim otherwise! I'm talking about the first half of 2A, which is the topic of this thread.

You're not paying attention.

OH, I'm paying attention and all you're doing is trying to make a case where it's OK for the Government to take firearms from people who have committed no crime.
The same Government that the 2A was designed to protect us from.

[USFREEDOM911]

I don't see the difference between trolling using a new account or an old one for logical reasons.

It was written to consider how you see the difference or not.

It was written for the purpose it was intended for.

Deal with it.

[volsrock]

Why don't gun nuts get that the 2nd amendment very specifically infers that though the right to bear arms shall not be infringed that this right does not come without regulations? Do they just read only the part of the 2nd amendment that the like and not the whole thing?

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.



right of the people to keep and bear Arms

It does not say right of the Militia to keep and bear Arms

[Mott the Hoople]

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.



right of the people to keep and bear Arms

It does not say right of the Militia to keep and bear Arms

Good lord who drug up this 5 year old thread?

[LV426]

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.
right of the people to keep and bear Arms
It does not say right of the Militia to keep and bear Arms

If you're going to apply originalist thinking to the Constitution, then you must apply that same originalist thinking to what "arms" meant back in the 18th century.

So people have the right to have muskets, but not handguns, semi-automatics, rifles, or shotguns.

Just muskets.

[USFREEDOM911]

If you're going to apply originalist thinking to the Constitution, then you must apply that same originalist thinking to what "arms" meant back in the 18th century.

So people have the right to have muskets, but not handguns, semi-automatics, rifles, or shotguns.

Just muskets.

Then get off your computer; because the 1st doesn't say anything about the internet.

<drops mic and walks off>