In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.

2nd Amendment Clarification

thebutcherthebutcher Member Posts: 374 ✭✭✭
edited December 2001 in General Discussion
Does the 2nd Amendment say, "A well regulated militia, being necessary for the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, so long as they take a state sponsored safety course and submit their photograph and fingerprints."?
The definition of an "expert":An "X" is an unknown quantity and a "spurt" is a drip under pressure.
· Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Comments

  • salzosalzo Member Posts: 6,396 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    The second amendment says whatever the antis want it to say.There is an interesting case going on in Ohio at the moment. People are suing the state because the are not allowed to carry weapons. It is illegal in the state of Ohio to carry a weapon on you. However the constitution of Ohio clearly states that the right to keep and bear arms for your personal protection shall not be infringed. One would think, after reading the Ohio constitution, that Ohios law is anti-constitutional(ohio const.) But thems just words. We are talking law here.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • njretcopnjretcop Member Posts: 7,975
    edited November -1
    Butcher, apparently that is exactly the way it reads here in the People's Republik of NJ. or so our asteemed politicans think.
    It's the stuff dreams are made of AngelMember: NRA, RKBA, NJSPBA, NJ area rep for the 2AMPD and the AARP. njretcop@copmail.com [This message has been edited by njretcop (edited 11-30-2001).]
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • salzosalzo Member Posts: 6,396 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    njretcop- I seem to remember the New Jersey constitution having nothing that gives its citizens the right to keep and bear arms. Am I correct on that?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • thebutcherthebutcher Member Posts: 374 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    MA grants it only for the common defense (sic).
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • pops401pops401 Member Posts: 616 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    "The second admendment was never intended to allow private citizens to 'keep and bear arms.' If it had, there would have wording such as 'the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.'"--- Ken Konecki
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Judge DreadJudge Dread Member Posts: 2,372 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I think a "conspiracy" type operation have erased the minds of people in this forum...ALLWAYS THE FACTS ARE FORGOTEN and AN USELESSdialectic enters into and endless loop of self -imposed stupor ....The Lessons Of History - The Founding Fathers On Right To Bear ArmsBy Phyllis Schlafly - The Schlafly ReportJune, 2000 * James Madison: Americans have "the advantage of being armed" -- unlike the citizens of other countries where "the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms." * Patrick Henry: "The great objective is that every man be armed. . . . Everyone who is able may have a gun." * George Mason: "To disarm the people [is] the best and most effectual way to enslave them." * Samuel Adams: "The Constitution shall never be construed . . . to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms." * Alexander Hamilton: "The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed." * Richard Henry Lee: "To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them." The chief reason America has remained a free country is the widespread private ownership of firearms. Individual ownership of guns made the American Revolution possible. The principal purpose of the Second Amendment was to maintain our freedom from government. It is an insult to our heritage to imply that the Founding Fathers wrote the Second Amendment just to protect deer hunters. My good friend, the late Reverend Stephen Dunker, C.M., was a missionary in China who was imprisoned by the Communists during the early 1950s. I heard him tell of his experiences many times. When the Communists first took over the area where he lived, they appeared to be good rulers. They established law and order and cleaned up the traffic in drugs and prostitutes. Then one day the Communist bosses announced, "You can see that we have established a good society and you have no need for your guns. Everyone must come in the night and dump all guns in the town square." The people believed and obeyed. The next day, the reign of terror began, with public executions and cruel imprisonments. Everyone accused of being a "landlord" was dragged through the streets and executed; a "landlord" was anyone who farmed his little plot of ground with two water buffalo instead of one. Gun confiscation leads to a loss of freedom, increased crime, and the government moving to the left. This has already happened in England and Australia. After Great Britain banned most guns in 1997, making armed self-defense punishable as murder, violence skyrocketed because criminals know that law abiding citizens have been disarmed. Armed crime rose 10% in 1998. The Sunday Times of London reported on the new black market in guns: "Up to 3 million illegal guns are in circulation in Britain, leading to a rise in drive-by shootings and gangland-style execution." There has been such a heavy increase in the use of knives for violent attacks that new laws have been passed giving police the power to search anyone for knives in designated areas. In 1996 Australia banned 60% of all firearms and required registration of all guns and the licensing of gun owners. Police confiscated 640,381 firearms, going door to door without search warrants. Two years later, the Australian Bureau of Statistics reported that all crime had risen and armed robberies were up 44%. Miguel A. Faria Jr., M.D., described his first-hand experience in Cuba. Before 1958, Cuban dictator Fulgencio Batista had all citizens register their firearms. After the revolution, Raul and Fidel Castro had their Communist thugs go door to door and, using the registration lists, confiscate all firearms. As soon as the Cubans were disarmed, that was the end of their freedom. Tyrannical governments kill far more people than private criminals. The Nazis conducted a massive search-and-seizure operation in 1933 to disarm their political opponents, in 1938 to disarm the Jews, and when they occupied Europe in 1939-41 they proclaimed the death penalty for anyone who failed to surrender all guns within 24 hours. The first line of safety has to be an ability to defend yourself. In some areas, a woman who is being stalked by her ex-husband must wait 10 days to buy a gun, even if her life has been threatened. Some cities criminalize carrying guns for self-defense but make exceptions for people carrying money or jewels. Are money and jewels more important to protect than people's lives? History teaches us that registration leads to the confiscation of guns and that is the goal of many gun control advocates. Pete Shields, founder of Handgun Control Inc., told The New Yorker: "The first problem is to slow down the number of handguns being produced and sold in this country. The second problem is to get handguns registered. The final problem is to make possession of all handguns and all handgun ammunition -- except for the military, police, licensed security guards, licensed sporting clubs, and licensed gun collectors -- totally illegal." Atlanta public-safety commissioner George Napper told U.S News, "If I had my druthers, the only people who would have guns would be those who enforce the law." Like those who "enforced the law" at Waco? or at Ruby Ridge? or invading a Miami home to grab Eli?n Gonzalez? The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution states: "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." Polls show that up to 80% of the public believe citizens have a constitutional right to own guns. If the First Amendment read "A free press being necessary to the security of a free state, Congress shall make no law respecting . . . the freedom of speech, or of the press," nobody would argue that free speech belongs only to newspapers. Likewise, they should not argue that the right to keep and bear arms belongs only to government agents. Chief Justice William Rehnquist, writing for the majority in U.S. v. Verdugo-Urquidez (1990), stated that the term "the people" has the same meaning in the First, Second, Fourth, Ninth and Tenth Amendments. All those five amendments in the Bill of Rights use the term "the people" to guarantee a right for individual citizens, not just some collective right of the state as a whole. There is no reason to believe that the Second Amendment uses the term "the people" differently from the other four amendments. The claim that "militia" just refers to the National Guard is ridiculous. The same Congress that passed the Second Amendment also passed the Militia Act of 1792 which defined militia as "each and every able-bodied male citizen" from age 18 to 45 (with some exceptions) and stated that each one shall "provide himself" with a gun, ammunition, and a bayonet. The currently effective Militia Act substantially keeps the same language ("all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and . . . under 45"), and further defines militia as: "(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and (2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia." (10 U.S.C. 311) In recent years, a scholarly consensus has emerged across the political spectrum that the Second Amendment protects an individual right. Between 1980 and 1995, of 39 law review articles, 35 noted the Supreme Court's prior acknowledgement of the individual right of the Second Amendment and only four claimed the right is a collective right of the states (and 3 of those 4 were authored or co-authored by persons connected with the gun-control lobby). The Founding Fathers on the Right to Own Guns: * James Madison: Americans have "the advantage of being armed" -- unlike the citizens of other countries where "the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms." * Patrick Henry: "The great objective is that every man be armed. . . . Everyone who is able may have a gun." * George Mason: "To disarm the people [is] the best and most effectual way to enslave them." * Samuel Adams: "The Constitution shall never be construed . . . to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms." * Alexander Hamilton: "The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed." * Richard Henry Lee: "To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them." _____ For more information: John Lott Jr., More Guns, Less Crime (2nd edition, 2000). Miguel A. Faria Jr., M.D., articles on England and Australia in the Medical Sentinel, May/June 2000, and letter on Cuba to the editor of the Wall Street Journal, December 28, 1999. Professor Sanford Levinson, "The Embarrassing Second Amendment," Yale Law Journal, 1989. Professor James D. Wright, "Second Thoughts about Gun Control," The Public Interest, Spring 1988. Stephen P. Halbrook, That Every Man Be Armed, Independent Institute, 1994, and the Wall Street Journal, June 4, 1999. Daniel D. Polsby, Firearms and Crime, Independent Institute, 1997. Joyce Lee Malcolm, lecture at the Independent Institute, September 21, 1999, http://www.independent.org/ For law review articles, gun court cases, and the 1982 Senate report, see http://www.2ndlawlib.org/. >>
    I judge Thee!, Not for what you are , but for what you say !
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • the loveable rat...the loveable rat... Member Posts: 969 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    i'm not a johnny reb, but "state's rights" figure prominently(or mysteriously, depending on your perspective) in all sorts of ways..."good!", i say- if you'd like to live in a crime free and loving environment with people who share your geography and interest in failed government you can go to a state called california. if you'd like to hope for the best in the butt!@#e of the west, gun in hand- texas is for you(take it easy- bum phillips look-a-likes, just a joke)...my point is: our rights are nothing more than a list of wishes, agreed upon and defended- both actvities evolve through time...i would rather it vary a bit, due to geographic boundary and history,etc., than a nation of sameness, defined only by television preferences and account balances...perhaps we are past this idea of collective "right" and that one code is best for all. but i hope not...
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • cbxjeffcbxjeff Member Posts: 17,597 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    JD, A fine reply. My answer is "so what". The gov. is so set for gun confiscation, although not called that just that, that I don't know if we really have a chance. I'm not a history major, but I am aware of what you speak. I'm a strong NRA member but sometimes I think that this is a no win situation. Everything is politics. Everything for a vote. I hate to be a bummer here, but I believe things are much worse that we think. I'm not so worried about myself, but my sons and their family have to deal with this.
    cbxjeffIt's too late for me, save yourself.
    It's too late for me, save yourself.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Judge DreadJudge Dread Member Posts: 2,372 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Its simple OLD and OBSOLETE always dies and is replaced .THIS NATURAL LAW aplies to nations and goverments too ,Unless A TRANSMUTATION OCCURS. Untill then,,, AMERICA IS DOOMED !
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • edharoldedharold Member Posts: 465 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    The Second Amendment was very badly drafted. Other than being very bad use of the English language, that little bit of retoric about a militia is not a good touch and serves no purpose other than to give the antis a loophole to come after us with. If it had been clearly written the only way they could come after us would be through a constitutional amendment, which they probably could never get passed.
    "They that would give up liberty to obtain safety deserve neither liberty nor safety"Benj. Franklin, 1759
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • turboturbo Member Posts: 820 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Not a bad piece of writing?, for backwards country bumpkins. So I supposed we should let the likes of Al Gore or b. clinton ammend the language for better clarification?Yeah right...
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • pops401pops401 Member Posts: 616 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    one more for the judge* Patrick Henry. "Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense?"Good job Judge!
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • thebutcherthebutcher Member Posts: 374 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Judge, The facts have not been forgotten by anyone on this post. The facts are that my state does not allow people to buy firearms without a license, and all firearms are registered. The facts show that regardless of the quotes you posted, antis are stripping our rights further everyday. Those facts are much more relevant in reality than the quotes of the founders, precisely because they are the ones used to destroy our rights. If you go into a court quoting Patrick Henry, you are going to lose. You shouldn't, but you will.
    The definition of an "expert":An "X" is an unknown quantity and a "spurt" is a drip under pressure.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
Sign In or Register to comment.