A well regulated militia...

[NightWatcher]

Last edited Thu May 29, 2014, 03:45 PM - Edit history (1)

On Edit: I know we have a whole forum dedicated to this argument. I just refuse to go there and the claims of 2nd Amendment protection just pissed me off this week after yet another massacre.


Sorry, Mods

[Maedhros]

1. I found this article also interesting in the context of this discussion:

http://www.english.illinois.edu/-people-/faculty/debaron/essays/guns.pdf

English common law had long acknowledged the importance of effective arms
control, and the meaning of the Second Amendment seemed clear to the framers and their
contemporaries: that the people have a right to possess arms when serving in the militia.
Over the years, this “collective rights” interpretation of the Second Amendment was
upheld in three Supreme Court decisions, in 1876, 1886, and most recently, in 1939
(Bogus 2000). The meaning of the Second Amendment remained uncontroversial until
1960, when a law review article using sources like American Rifleman asserted an
additional, individual, right to bear arms for the purposes of self-defense (Hays 1960).
Since that time, a growing bloc of constitutional scholars and historians has asserted that
only the individual rights interpretation of the right to bear arms is correct, even calling
this new reading the “standard model,” as if the original, collective rights interpretation
hadn’t prevailed for more than a century (Bogus 2000b). And the majority of Americans
now believe that the Second Amendment guarantees their right to tote a gun.

Over the past twenty years, the individual rights model has been used to block
passage of gun control laws, or to undercut them – for example, the assault weapons ban
of 1994 was allowed to expire ten years later because of pressure from gun-rights organizations.

[hack89]

2. The 2A allows the strict regulation of guns. It is not your problem.

It has never stopped an AWB, gun registration or limits on types of ammunition/magazines. According to the Supreme Court, the only right protected by the Constitution is the right to own a handgun in your home for self defense. That is it. Even Scalia says that guns can be strictly regulated.

The reasons you can't get the laws you want has nothing to do with the 2A - it has everything to do with the cultural and political realities of modern America.

[NightWatcher]

3. the pro-gun people like to quote this as their sole argument

Because any other argument falls flat on its face when put up against the 90+% of people who favor some control or pictures of Sandy Hook, Columbine, or any other massacre du jour.

[bossy22]

6. some pro-gun people

don't lump all of them into a single group.

[NightWatcher]

8. True. Some.

[hack89]

7. It is not arguing against anything - it is a simple statement of fact

the 2A is not your problem. It is a political problem - the votes are not there.

[NightWatcher]

9. I agree 100%

I think it's one of those roads we've gone too far down to ever come back from.

[bossy22]

4. the problem is the founding era isn't the "end all" when it comes to constitutional interpretations

Do we really wan't to legitimize (even more) the "originalist" doctrine? If we were to take the same line of reasoning as this article states there would be no more Roe V wade, no more protection of electronic speech, etc....

As someone who believes the 2A confers an individual right I'll freely admit there is evidence supporting a collective rights model as well. I can't ignore that. What my issue is, that much of it comes after U.S. V Miller, which if you know the history of it, was very "weird" and the decision itself was very short. I think (and scholars) have believed that courts read too much into Miller's holdings

[aikoaiko]

5. They wanted to ensure that the people had arms to constitute a militia as needed.

The state may or may not be able to provide arms, but as long as the people's right to keep and bear arms is not infringed, then a militia can always be formed by a state.


So yes, the 2nd protects a closet full of guns.

[YarnAddict]

10. In context

All of the other rights outlined in the Bill of Rights are individual rights. I think that in context, it means an individual can have a closetful of guns, if that's what he wants.