in the wake of yet another, another, another, another shooting, I - TopicsExpress



          

in the wake of yet another, another, another, another shooting, I wound up posting this somewhere else... given that the NRA has seemingly rewritten the intent of our Constitution, and that the 2nd amendment is often invoked as some kind of absolute, entirely unrestricted right to bear arms,--though usually without reference to its specific contents--and seeing as the 4.5% of the world population that lives in the US owns 40% of the entire worlds civilian handguns, it seems worth revisiting this foundational document the linked page is long, but it addresses that whole well regulated militia question... upshot: the 2nd amendment does not in any way endorse or enable everyone and their momma to pack heat...Our current free-for-all has nothing to do with a state-run militia, and is certainly not well regulated. What this dude has to say: The term “well regulated” in the 2nd amendment actually encompasses both meanings of the term “well regulated” (i.e., “well regulated” as one might consider a clock to be, and “well regulated” as one might think of in a legal framework)! “Well regulated” meant that State militias were to be well trained (i.e., they were to gather together and practice, drill, etc., on a regular basis) and that training was to be supervised by the States (i.e., the States were to appoint officers who were to oversee that training). (This was the clock-like aspect of well regulated.) But at the same time, “well regulated” also referred to the lawful power the Congress (which was comprised, after all, of representatives of the States) was to have over the State militias, that is, Congress was to promulgate and enact a system of rules governing the conduct and/or activity of said militias, as well as the legal authority the President would have over them when acting as Commander-in-Chief. (This was the legal aspect of well regulated.) In other words, the use of the term “well regulated” in the 2nd amendment wasn’t meant to be an ‘either-or’, ‘black-and-white’ proposition, it was meant to be an all-inclusive term that covered all possible aspects of the situation viz a viz militias. thomhartmann/forum/2013/04/regarding-pesky-%E2%80%9Cwell-regulated-militia%E2%80%9D-2nd-amendment-what-exactly-did-it-mean
Posted on: Fri, 06 Jun 2014 04:23:39 +0000

Trending Topics



Recently Viewed Topics




© 2015