Skip to main content

Poll

Should Ordinary Citizens be allowed to own, carry, & use Firearms to defend their own lives, & the lives of their family & friends?

  • Absolutely Yes!
  • I thinks so.
  • I don't think so.
  • Definitely No!
  • My name isn't String, so let me have a icy cold beer so I can ponder the options...

Topic: Gun Control - Should Ordinary Citizens Own, Carry, & Use Firearms? (Read 137282 times)

Gun Control - Should Ordinary Citizens Own, Carry, & Use Firearms?
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."

Do you know the history behind those words?

Should Ordinary Citizens be allowed to own, carry, & use Firearms to defend their own lives, & the lives of their family & friends?

Was the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution created to just protect a Citizen's right to target shoot & hunt, or was it created so that all Citizens could defend their Right to be free from a Tyrannical & Abusive Government --- along with having the ability to target/sport shoot & hunt as simply an added bonus -- merely a by product?

Can Governments legislate 'Gun Control' effective enough to completely protect their Citizens from deranged shooters & criminals, hell bent on killing the innocent & disobeying all law?

If not, do Ordinary Citizens have a 'Natural Right' to self-defend -- to protect their own lives, & the lives of their loved ones?

Will American Citizens, or any citizens of any country for that matter,  be safer & better off if only the Government & Law Enforcement had Firearms? Does recent History (within the past 100 years or so) show this to be fact?

What do you think, & most importantly ----   why?

This thread was created as a continuation of a thread in the old MyOpera Forum, which will be closing March 1st., 2014

  • Last Edit: 2014-12-15, 06:38:42 by SmileyFaze

  • rjhowie
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: Gun Control - Should Ordinary Citizens Own, Carry, & Use Firearms?
Reply #1525
And nutjoblanders boast about being the greatest country in the world?? Not surprised mental medical world is such big business. If it isn't the population who are gun mad so too are many of what are called "police."
"Quit you like men:be strong"

  • Mr. Tennessee
  • [*][*][*]
Re: Gun Control - Should Ordinary Citizens Own, Carry, & Use Firearms?
Reply #1526
"If it isn't the population who are gun mad so too are many of what are called "police.""
WHAT!

  • rjhowie
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: Gun Control - Should Ordinary Citizens Own, Carry, & Use Firearms?
Reply #1527
Uh-oh, truth can hurt.
"Quit you like men:be strong"

  • jax
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Global Moderator
Re: Gun Control - Should Ordinary Citizens Own, Carry, & Use Firearms?
Reply #1528
So can grammar.

  • rjhowie
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: Gun Control - Should Ordinary Citizens Own, Carry, & Use Firearms?
Reply #1529
Oh dear. What a pompously snooty comment.  :irked:

Anyway this subject continued for ages on Opera with us then the same damn thing has happened here. It is going to go round and round for ever. Time it was ditched.
"Quit you like men:be strong"

  • ersi
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: Gun Control - Should Ordinary Citizens Own, Carry, & Use Firearms?
Reply #1530


That's right. Forget that part about well-regulated militia being necessary for the security of the state. That part never existed.

  • Frenzie
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Administrator
Re: Gun Control - Should Ordinary Citizens Own, Carry, & Use Firearms?
Reply #1531
Maybe it's on the other shoulder.

(Yeah... who am I kidding. :) )

  • SmileyFaze
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: Gun Control - Should Ordinary Citizens Own, Carry, & Use Firearms?
Reply #1532



What's on that patch, & above, is the second of two (2) complete, & distinct, clauses within the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution, clearly defined for us by the United States Supreme Court in their landmark decision in D.C. vs Heller



Source:     MIC     
Quote
A common misconception about the Second Amendment is that it only protects arms for the militia, or in modern day, the National Guard or other government-organized military group.

This is simply untrue; a belief arising from ignorance about the language used in the Second Amendment and understanding its meaning as it was understood originally when the Bill of Rights was ratified.

Fortunately, the Supreme Court helps us understand the original intent of the Second Amendment and the words used in their historical context.

In the landmark Supreme Court case, D.C. vs Heller, the court explains that all citizens are the militia; the Second Amendment is an individual right, just like every other right protected in the Bill of Rights, and is independent of membership in any organized group or military unit.

The Second Amendment reads: "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."

There are two clauses that comprise the Second Amendment, an operative clause, and a prefatory clause.

Operative clause: "The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

The operative clause is the actual protected right; kind of the 'meat and potatoes.' The court wrote: "1. Operative Clause. a. 'Right of the People.' [used 3 times in Bill of Rights] ... All three of these instances unambiguously refer to individual rights, not 'collective' rights, or rights that may be exercised only through participation in some corporate body." (p.5). 

Prefatory clause: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State."

The prefatory clause is the lead-in that "announces a purpose" for the operative clause.  The court stated: "The Amendment's prefatory clause announces a purpose, but does not limit or expand the scope of the second part, the operative clause. The operative clause's text and history demonstrate that it connotes an individual right to keep and bear arms"(Heller law syllabus p.1).

The court also stated: "The Amendment could be rephrased, 'Because a well regulated Militia is necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.'" (Heller law syllabus p.3, emphasis added).

Note: "syllabus" in law briefs is not like a college course summary, but "a short note preceding the text of a reported case that briefly summarizes the rulings of the court on the points decided in the case."

The Militia is all of the people

The court states: "It was clearly an individual right, having nothing whatever to do with service in a militia" (p.20), adding "Reading the Second Amendment as protecting only the right to "keep and bear Arms" in an organized militia therefore fits poorly with the operative clause's description of the holder of that right as "the people" (p.7).

It's clear from the court's ruling regarding the relationship between the prefatory and operative clause (p.25) that the militia meant that all of the people were armed.

"The 'militia' comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense. The Anti-federalists feared that the federal government would disarm the people in order to disable this citizens' militia, enabling a politicized standing army or a select militia to rule. The response was to deny Congress power to abridge the ancient right of individuals to keep and bear arms, so that the ideal of a citizens' militia would be preserved" (Heller law syllabus, p.2, emphasis added).

"Keep arms" was simply a common way of referring to possessing arms, for militiamen and everyone else" (p.9).

Congress creates the Army and Navy, but not the already existent militia

The court states that while Congress is given the power in Article I of the Constitution to create the Army and the Navy, it may simply organize the militia because it already existed:

"Unlike armies and navies, which Congress is given the power to create, the militia is assumed by Article I already to be in existence. Congress is given the power ... to organize "the" militia, connoting a body already in existence," (p.23).

Second Amendment doesn't mean any organized military unit

We find on page 11: "In numerous instances, 'bear arms' was unambiguously used to refer to the carrying of weapons outside of an organized militia," adding further that, "It is clear from those formulations that 'bear arms' did not refer only to carrying a weapon in an organized military unit" (p.11-12).  Fun fact: The National Guard, as it exists today, wasn't created until 1903.

So we see that at the time of its writing, it was clearly understood that the Second Amendment protected the right of all citizenry to have and carry arms. Our ignorance of the terminology, and perhaps the phrasing of the two clauses has clouded this truth, so obvious to our Founders. The Second Amendment means all of us, since we are all the militia, and in no way means only an organized military unit or the National Guard.



I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you........






  • Last Edit: 2018-10-19, 07:44:23 by SmileyFaze
     In times of universal deceit, telling the honest truth is a revolutionary act.

  • ersi
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: Gun Control - Should Ordinary Citizens Own, Carry, & Use Firearms?
Reply #1533
Nonsense is not worth understanding, but thanks for explaining. It is reassuring to see you stand firm on the side of nonsense.

Edit: The pattern of nonsense - you are ignoring the first part. Then you claim to be explaining the first part, even though you only talk about "militia" and not "the security of a free state". As soon as the so-called explanation is done, you promptly get back to ignoring the *entire* first part, both militia and the security of a free state.

To stoop to your level, I should ignore the entire second part. Then of course you would whine that the second part was getting ignored. You would never notice that you were being served your own rules of the game.

But I will not stoop to your level. You can keep your nonsense.
  • Last Edit: 2018-10-22, 09:06:12 by ersi

  • Barulheira
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Bear arms
Reply #1534
Bear arms? If you prefer so...


  • Mr. Tennessee
  • [*][*][*]
Re: Gun Control - Should Ordinary Citizens Own, Carry, & Use Firearms?
Reply #1535
The first time I ran into a man with a gun was in a little restaurant. He had a holster with in a revolver. My first thought was to get the hell out of the place.
https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQPlJxJwsRmJJKEHZLIyO9e6ErOolxvfct0hEz5_y8fTGtXXE5InQ