@WearsHats@thezenlady@mls14@StillIRise1963@maya_b don't invent history when we have it actually documented what they deliberated about when drafting the 2A. Use the contents of the writings in the Founder's Constitution as your arguments instead.
The Whiskey Rebellion was an armed insurrection against the federal government by citizens claiming governments overreach and unjust burdensome taxes. President Washington called up the well-regulated militias in the name of national defense, legally obligating them to fight under his command whether they agreed or not, and quashed the revolt. That's what the 2nd Amendment is for. Not to legalize treason but to arm the government against it.
Exactly. These NRA gun nuts claim the 2nd Amendment gives the right to bear arms to protect against the federal government. As one friend of mine mentioned, even with assault weapons, the US federal government's weapon arsenal including bombs, tanks, etc still greatly outweighs their assault rifles. It's a meaningless argument. Russia's funding of the NRA explains why we are even having to deal with this issue.
@WearsHats@thezenlady@StillIRise1963@maya_b Exactly. The right-wing judges completely ignore the first half of the amendment. It says we need the militia for national defense. But America has a regular Army now (which it didn’t at the time of the 2A). We have the most powerful military in the world! This obviates the plainly stated reason for the right to bear arms. Therefore, the right is no longer applicable.
It's a "well-regulated militia" for national security. At the time, the only military the US had were the US militias, renamed in 1903 to the National Guard. They now supply their troops with guns.
Warren Burger, Nixon's chief justice of SCOTUS, said he'd strike 2A if he could because the plain language makes it clear that it's moot. He said the gun lobby's claims there were 2A rights was "the greatest hoax ever perpetuated on the American people."
If we truly had a "well regulated" gun control (that well regulated part of the 2nd Amendment they leave out), we should: 1)require training 2)require licensing (like getting a driver's license) 3)require insurance for liability coverage or revoke license (free market insurance companies are good at identifying risk) 4)follow US Army/Marine rules where when an assault rifle or gun is not in use for training or war, that gun is always locked up - same for hunting.
that's already part of California law, or proposed anyway - the firing pin has to be coded to the gun, so each shell casing will have a stamp on it from the gun that it was fired from
Chris Rock had it right at $5000 per bullet. You need a 3rd job, 3rd mortgage and save up for a year (or whatever it was) to shoot someone in the butt.
@WearsHats@StillIRise1963@maya_b@mls14@thezenlady as you'll see, there absolutely were objections to the "well trained militia" part but they rejected changes to it on procedural grounds. Clearly it was expected that this would be revisited and it would be further refined. (like a lot of our Constitution)