|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
NY: Second Amendment explained for the masses
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
The purpose of the Second Amendment is to protect the ability of each state to call up its army. It precludes the new central government from disarming the people of the state. It was not intended by its framers, its framers being the states, to prevent the states from regulating firearms or to frustrate each state’s normal police powers to protect the health and safety of their communities.
An individual’s right to bear arms, to the extent such a right exists, may be based on historical precedent or traditional usage or state law, which precedent or usage or state law can be recognized and upheld by the central government. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(12/24/2021)
|
Condescending legerdemain.
As was pointed out in commentary, the right is grammatically isolated in the operative clause, which is in and of itself a full sentence:
"The right of the People to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed."
The amendment specifically brushes aside the 'collective right' argument by its very structure. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| I do believe that where there is a choice only between cowardice and violence, I would advise violence. Thus when my eldest son asked me what he should have done had he been present when I was almost fatally assaulted in 1908 [by an Indian extremist opposed to Gandhi's agreement with Smuts], whether he should have run away and seen me killed or whether he should have used his physical force which he could and wanted to use, and defend me, I told him it was his duty to defend me even by using violence. Hence it was that I took part in the Boer War, the so-called Zulu Rebellion and [World War I]. Hence also do I advocate training in arms for those who believe in the method of violence. I would rather have India resort to arms in order to defend her honor than that she should in a cowardly manner become or remain a helpless witness to her own dishonor. — Mohandas K. Gandhi, Young India, August 11, 1920 from Fischer, Louis ed.,The Essential Gandhi, 1962 |
|
|
