Help: Gun debate thread

Subject: RE: Help: Gun debate thread
From: Gary T
Date: 19 Apr 00 - 07:06 PM

Caitrin, the militia is obviously made up individual militiamen, who are the people mentioned in the amendment's second phrase. In the definition Midchuck shared with us about 10 posts up, you can see that the militia in question is an unorganized body, not an organized one. It still DOES NOT say that you ONLY get to bear arms on the CONDITION that you're in some militia. It says you get to bear them BECAUSE we NEED a militia, said militia being essentially every citizen, if and when needed.

To paraphrase it in modern language: Since having every citizen ready to put up a good fight is necessary to protect our country's security and freedom, the right...

Note how compactly the original language states the above. Good writing. Unfortunately, "well regulated" gets misinterpreted as meaning "carefully controlled and organized", and "militia" gets misinterpreted as "National Guard". When one considers the amendment in the context of the political climate and language usage of the time when it was written, it becomes a l-o-n-g stretch, and an ungrammatical one, to read it as meaning "Only within an organized militia..."

Subject: RE: Help: Gun debate thread
From: JedMarum
Date: 19 Apr 00 - 07:19 PM

I am sure that most Americans agree that the consitution provides them the right to bear arms, and that means to them they have a right to own fire-arms. I am equally sure that any significant attempt to prohibit the ownership of firearms, would result very quickly in mass civil disobedience, major bloodshed, and most likely a second US Civil War. (I don't condone this, but I would expect it).

I can't see why US citizens need automtic weapons, but I understand the arguement that says the constitution allows for each citizen to arm himself, not for hunting, not for sport, but for self protection including for self protection from unlawful military organizations that may be threatening them. The courts have upheld the major components of these arguements. Change the consitution? It's possible ... but unlikely since ownership is soo pervasive, and support for the right so widespread? And why should all this take place?? Why should we take guns away from a huge protion of our society? Why should we punish all because a few are irresponsible, and a few more are willfull destroyers of life?

Subject: RE: Help: Gun debate thread
From: GUEST,Frank Hamilton
Date: 20 Apr 00 - 05:33 PM

Didn't know that the Creator supports the NRA through "inalienable rights". Maybe that's why they hired Charlton Heston. :)

Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition. :)

Frank

Subject: RE: Help: Gun debate thread
From: Mbo
Date: 20 Apr 00 - 05:40 PM

Wow, you folks sure know a lot about the Constitution! All I know is "We the people"! Guess I know more about music or something...

--Mbo

Subject: RE: Help: Gun debate thread
From: Gary T
Date: 20 Apr 00 - 06:20 PM

Well, gosh, Mbo, you just need to find a music-related web site. (VBG)

Subject: RE: Help: Gun debate thread
From: kendall
Date: 20 Apr 00 - 06:36 PM

Hey GAGoyle, I wondered if you were ever coming out from under your rock again! I missed you