So, yeah, the 2nd Amendment means exactly what it says: people have a
right to arms with which they can fight an enemy. And, if necessary to
fight the government if it becomes tyrannical as happened in 1773-76.
According to Barry Gold <bg...@labcats.org>:
So, yeah, the 2nd Amendment means exactly what it says: people have aThat's not what the 2nd amendment actually says or means, although
right to arms with which they can fight an enemy. And, if necessary to >fight the government if it becomes tyrannical as happened in 1773-76.
there are certainly plenty of people who wish it did and pretend it
doesn't include the first part: "A well regulated militia, being
necessary to the security of a free State".
The history of the 2nd amendment is surprisingly thin but the best explanation I've seen is that the southern states used state militias
to fight slave rebellions. They worried that northern abolitionists
would outlaw state militias and leave them with no way to keep slaves
under control. Hence the language about well regulated state militias.
--
Regards,
John Levine, jo...@taugh.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly
The history of the 2nd amendment is surprisingly thin but the best
explanation I've seen is that the southern states used state militias
to fight slave rebellions. They worried that northern abolitionists
would outlaw state militias and leave them with no way to keep slaves
under control. Hence the language about well regulated state militias.
Many people claim to see a right to armed revolution in the constitution:
https://thefederalist.com/2016/06/20/the-second-amendment-isnt-about-hunting-or-self-defense-but-revolution/
"The Second Amendment Guarantees the Right of Revolution ...
According to S K <skpflex1@gmail.com>:
The history of the 2nd amendment is surprisingly thin but the best
explanation I've seen is that the southern states used state militias
to fight slave rebellions. They worried that northern abolitionists
would outlaw state militias and leave them with no way to keep slaves
under control. Hence the language about well regulated state militias.
Many people claim to see a right to armed revolution in the constitution:
https://thefederalist.com/2016/06/20/the-second-amendment-isnt-about-hunting-or-self-defense-but-revolution/
"The Second Amendment Guarantees the Right of Revolution ...
There was a well organized right wing effort starting in the 1960s to
rewrite the history of the 2nd amendment from what everyone had
understood for two centuries (see above) to an "insurrectionist" >reinterpretation about individual gun ownwership unrelated to militias
or regulation. It was amazingly successful, culminating with the
bizarrely ahistorical Heller vs DC in 2008 in which five supreme court >justices decided that 200 years of history was wrong.
The Federalist Society was right in the middle of this project so it's not >surprising they'd
publish stuff like that.
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 399 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 99:10:57 |
Calls: | 8,363 |
Calls today: | 2 |
Files: | 13,162 |
Messages: | 5,897,780 |