|
|
|
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:
The Second Amendment often is misinterpreted
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
are 7 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
As one who spends much of his time reading and listening to political rhetoric from across the spectrum, left-wing and right-wing alike, I'm especially fond of the nonsense I frequently encounter about the U.S. Constitution.
Take, for example, the popular claim that the Second Amendment guarantees almost every American the sacred right to own and bear almost any type of firearms. That's an easy one to knock down.
|
| Comment by:
shootergdv
(12/31/2016)
|
| Guy conveniently forgets that "the people" means all of us. We were to be armed so we could participate in a well(trained) regulated militia if called upon. But "the people" were to be armed ! And we will continue to be so ! |
| Comment by:
MarkHamTownsend
(12/31/2016)
|
Irony of ironies; the author claims the 2A is "often miosinterpreted" but then author Cunningham proceeds to misinterpret it!!
"The right OF THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms" clearly states the PEOPLE'S right.
A lot of historical fact has been speciously added to buttress Cunningham's incorrect conclusions. Yes, the Whiskey Rebellion was put down, and rightfully; the rebels didn't understand the war was partially fought because they were being taxed without representation. NOW, they had representation -- and a war debt to pay.
YES, the militia is a STATE organizaion -- of the PEOPLE.
CONT'D---- |
| Comment by:
MarkHamTownsend
(12/31/2016)
|
The "Uniform Militia Act " of 1791 defined the militia as being comprised of two groups, the organized militia, and the UNorganized militia.
The author criticizes the militias' effectiveness in the Revolutionary Wsr, and indeed it was not the militia that WON the war, it was the Continental Army under Washington -- that got its collective butt kicked out of New York City.
Sorry, ya can't win 'em all -- even vaunted armies fail.
The militia was intended as a "first responder" to a crises --- to be supplanted by the U.S. Army when it arrived, or absorbed into it.
All these functions necessitated that the citizens be armed. With THEIR OWN GUNS. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(12/31/2016)
|
| HAH! Try posting a response. The 'comments' won't come up. |
| Comment by:
PP9
(12/31/2016)
|
"The Second Amendment often is misinterpreted..."
Indeed it is. Doesn't mean you had to provide an example!
Couple of points, though.
The author of the aforementioned example of misinterpretation of 2A tries to tell us that the meaning of "militia" has been redefined since the ratification of the Constitution. It doesn't matter, though, as the understanding of the meaning at the time it was ratified is what is in play.
Second... learn to read English! The first clause in the 2A clearly states the reason behind the operative clause, which is what has the force of law. |
| Comment by:
PP9
(12/31/2016)
|
If "A well-regulated militia, being necessary..." were replaced with "Because a well-practiced militia is necessary..." it would mean exactly the same thing, but it might be a little clearer to people who think that the RKBA is contingent upon membership in a militia, or that the founders supported gun "regulation" in the modern meaning of the word.
The founders were prolific writers, and they cannot have been more clear about what their opinions were regarding guns. The Constitution means what it meant at the time it was written (with the same being true of the amendments), not what some pro-authoritarian leftists can twist out of it now. |
| Comment by:
Sosalty
(1/1/2017)
|
| Yes it is. When I taught 5th grade Am History, I had to take all 32 student textbooks, white out the publishers definition of the 2A in the glossary and hand write the original and correct non-PC definition. Hard to imagine today's young adults being informed with so much disinformation thrust upon them. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| Those, who have the command of the arms in a country are masters of the state, and have it in their power to make what revolutions they please. [Thus,] there is no end to observations on the difference between the measures likely to be pursued by a minister backed by a standing army, and those of a court awed by the fear of an armed people. — Aristotle, as quoted by John Trenchard and Water Moyle, An Argument Shewing, That a Standing Army Is Inconsistent with a Free Government, and Absolutely Destructive to the Constitution of the English Monarchy [London, 1697]. |
|
|
