Quote (Leevee @ Oct 5 2017 11:46pm)

The amendment says that militias have the right to bear arms. It does not say that any person has the right to bear arms regardless of whether they are in a militia or not.

How much more simple can it actually get?

Quote (majorblood @ Oct 6 2017 02:21am)

what do you think a militia is?

Quote (majorblood @ Oct 6 2017 10:21am)

what do you think a militia is?

Quote (WeAwait @ 6 Oct 2017 01:48)

“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.”


Descriptions | Definitions

1. A militia is not a conventional army.

- A military force made up of citizens.
- The continental army was founded in 1775.


2. A militia is not only for defending against outside forces.

- Militias were used to fight troops from Great Britain during the revolutionary war. During the revolutionary war, Great Britain's government ruled the thirteen colonies.


3. Right to both keep and bear is important.

- Notice the government is not responsible for keeping arms, but it is the responsibility of the people to keep arms, so that they might maintain control of their own state.


4. What was chief threat to the "security of [the] free state" that was the young USA?

- Great Britain, its own government. Similar to how Catalonia is being oppressed today.


Conclusion

The right to keep and bear arms is not about hunting. The right to keep and bear arms is not about home defense.

The right of the people to keep and bear arms is about defending a free state from its own government.

Quote (Scaly @ Oct 6 2017 01:48am)

Seems like everyone ignores the part that states the militia should be 'well regulated'. I'm not entirely against militias. But I still don't see how that translates to every American being able to have high calibre weapons in their home. Essentially without any regulation whatsoever due to private gun sales.

Quote

Although the Constitution is drawn up in 1787, it is not ratified until December of 1791 when the Bill of Rights was finally agreed upon. Whether or not to include the Bill of Rights (and what to include inside it) was a matter of extreme contestation between the Founders and everything within it was deeply fought over.

When we look at the Second Amendment specifically, we should look at a few things before hand. First, by the 1790s, other small rebellions had popped up all over the country. Terry Bouton's article "A Road Closed: Rural Insurgency in Post-Independence Pennsylvania" (The Journal of American History, Vol. 87, No. 3 (Dec., 2000), pp. 855-887) masterfully explains the fighting and rebellion that took place in the rural countrysides of Pennsylvania that mirrored what had happened in Massachusetts with Shays' Rebellion. Simply put, the gentry were terrified that they were losing control of rural America, and as a result they would not be able to seize foreclosed land and collect taxes, which they deeply wanted. Empowering militias to be trained and carry firearms allowed the gentry to call up these men in times of need and suppress these rebellions that were taking place.

Now there was already precedent in existence for protecting militias and their rights to bear arms in many states. Multiple other bills of rights from other states had already protected a militia's right to bear arms (such as Section 13 of Virginia's Declaration of Rights) and many of these states were fighting to have the federal government protect this as well.

Now, look at the very wording of the Second Amendment.

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.

"A well regulated Militia" is the key phrase. They are referring to the militias led by people like Benjamin Lincoln and his Massachusetts Militia not Shays and his "rebellion". The initial goal was to protect a state's right to call up arms against rebels, not to arm the masses. The Founders feared that in some states (like Rhode Island) that were already being drastically controlled by the poor (rather than the gentry), that local governments would start being able to choose who could keep and bear arms, and that by creating the Second Amendment, the gentry would always have the ability to call up and arm militias in times of need.

Clarification: I also need to stress that this question mentioned Jefferson by name, however he was not a signer of the Constitution, but did certify the adoption of the Bill of Rights in 1792.

Quote (Leevee @ Oct 6 2017 03:41am)

A self organized army that is formed by citizens. Typically this happens during civil wars.

A random person walking the street is not necessarily part of a militia.

Quote (Leevee @ Oct 6 2017 12:46am)

The amendment says that militias have the right to bear arms. It does not say that any person has the right to bear arms regardless of whether they are in a militia or not.

How much more simple can it actually get?

Quote (majorblood @ 6 Oct 2017 09:57)

??