Why it's written that way

Homesteading & Country Living Forum

Help Support Homesteading & Country Living Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

VThillman

Geezer
Neighbor
Joined
Nov 27, 2017
Messages
3,926
Location
Southeastern Vermont
I've been arguing the intent of the 2nd Amendment with a friend for some time now. Woke up this morning with the question/debate resolved (in my mind, that is).

My primary defense of the amendment's intent to affirm the individual right to keep and bear arms has been the knowledge that the great majority of militia armories (where they actually had armories - most small towns didn't) did not store small arms; those were the property of individuals, and kept in their homes. Nearly all of those arms were shoulder weapons used for hunting, and for defense against Amerind incursions. AND recently, in opposition to their rulers, the government of Great Britain.

This morning I found that I had a conclusion. The authors had a dual purpose for the amendment. 1) They wanted the states to be assured that their militias would be preserved in the Constitution. 2) They wanted the citizens of the states to be assured that their guns would not be taken away. X) So the two assurances, being logically related according to the prevailing conditions, were summed in the 2nd Amendment.

I can't fault the authors, really. They couldn't know that their Brave New Nation would **** in its bed. The states have given up control of their militias to the federal government (essentially to the Executive), and the majority of the Nation's citizens have no training or even familiarity with small arms, and so fear them. We have 'come to a sorry pass'.
 
That's pretty good logic VT. Now if we could convince the non thinking sheep to use the brain God gave em'.... :bang Head:
 
If you want to understand the intent of the Second Amendment, you need to look at the documents written before the constitutional conventions in Philadelphia. Primarily, we were talking about the Federalist papers. Specifically, Federalist paper 46 is the one that most people cite, but 29 also contains thoughts regarding services right to bear arms. Here’s a good article that’s written with a lot of thoughtful insight.

http://theweek.com/articles/629815/how-alexander-hamilton-solved-americas-gun-problem--228-years-ago
 
.......
I can't fault the authors, really. They couldn't know that their Brave New Nation would **** in its bed. The states have given up control of their militias to the federal government (essentially to the Executive), and the majority of the Nation's citizens have no training or even familiarity with small arms, and so fear them. We have 'come to a sorry pass'.

Most framers were unsure how long the republic would last. Benjamin Franklin had a famous quote regarding the carving on a chair in the convention hall, with the sun. He didn’t know if the sun was rising or if the sun was setting, and he likened that to the birth of our nation. In the end, he concluded that it was a rising Sun. But that didn’t mean everyone was sure our experiment in democracy would take hold and flourish.
 
Back
Top