Pennsylvania Firearm Owners Association
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Walnutport, Pennsylvania
    (Northampton County)
    Posts
    326
    Rep Power
    258

    Default New (to me) interpretation of the 2A

    I was just reading through the comments section of a firearms-related article and came across a post with an interpretation of the 2nd Amendment that I had not heard before but makes complete sense. It looks like a great argument to use against the 2A "collectivists".

    Take a look and give me your thoughts...

    An unarmed militia is essentially just a "committee". An armed militia can be regulated by an unarmed populace, but only so far as they are willing to be regulated. They can never be well-regulated, except by a populace with the means to overthrow them by force, should the need arise. The armed populace are not the militia, they are the regulators thereof. In this view, the prefatory clause makes perfect sense, explains why it was considered necessary, and never restricts gun ownership to those in the militia. The militia doesn't need an explicit right to keep and bear arms. They already have arms, else they're not a militia.

    It gives maximum rights to "the people", and gives them another tool to restrict the power of a potentially corrupt government, which is in tune with the rest of the Bill of Rights. Arguments about the meaning of the Constitution can almost always be traced to someone trying to introduce some clever interpretation of language that was intentionally designed not to be clever. Phrases such as "shall make no law" and "shall not be infringed" are not clever.
    Let them take arms

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    PA, Pennsylvania
    (Delaware County)
    Posts
    3,604
    Rep Power
    1246703

    Default Re: New (to me) interpretation of the 2A

    Quote Originally Posted by rodder View Post
    I was just reading through the comments section of a firearms-related article and came across a post with an interpretation of the 2nd Amendment that I had not heard before but makes complete sense. It looks like a great argument to use against the 2A "collectivists".

    Take a look and give me your thoughts...
    It's an individual right...

    DC vs. Heller

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Madison Twp
    (Lackawanna County)
    Posts
    301
    Rep Power
    3680

    Default Re: New (to me) interpretation of the 2A

    Interesting, but it ignores the 18th century meaning of "well regulated." Most modern gun grabbers use it the same way, whereas it's original meaning was more along the lines of "well trained."

    ..and the Constitution doesn't GIVE rights to anyone.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Brookville, Pennsylvania
    (Jefferson County)
    Age
    51
    Posts
    20,076
    Rep Power
    21474874

    Default Re: New (to me) interpretation of the 2A

    Quote Originally Posted by Chainsaw View Post
    Interesting, but it ignores the 18th century meaning of "well regulated." Most modern gun grabbers use it the same way, whereas it's original meaning was more along the lines of "well trained."

    ..and the Constitution doesn't GIVE rights to anyone.
    Right.

    And, We the People, the creators of the Constitution(see Preamble) reserved the Right to Keep and Bear Arms to ourselves. If we wanted the States to be able to regulate our abilities to own or possess arms we would have written the Second Amendment to say the following like we did the 10th Amendment to share the Rights-

    1. "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed, except in subordination to the States."

    However, since We the People didn't write the Second Amendment as above - the Right is strictly reserved to the People.
    RIP: SFN, 1861, twoeggsup, Lambo, jamesjo, JayBell, 32 Magnum, Pro2A, mrwildroot, dregan, Frenchy, Fragger, ungawa, Mtn Jack, Grapeshot, R.W.J., PennsyPlinker, Statkowski, Deanimator, roland, aubie515

    Don't end up in my signature!

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Scranton, Pennsylvania
    (Lackawanna County)
    Posts
    2,869
    Rep Power
    21474854

    Default Re: New (to me) interpretation of the 2A

    There were two main schools of thought in the early days of the republic; yours is along the lines of 'A well-regulated militia being required...', 'the right of the PEOPLE shall not be infringed...'

    In other words, a sovereign state has need of a militia, but the armed populace can keep the militia (and by extension, the government) in check.

    The other school of thought, probably more accurate, is that THE PEOPLE 'ARE' the militia.

    The end result is more or less the same; the ultimate power of firearms should rest in the hands of THE PEOPLE.
    "...a REPUBLIC, if you can keep it."

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Witless Protection Program, Wisconsin
    Posts
    811
    Rep Power
    2804760

    Default Re: New (to me) interpretation of the 2A

    Well, back in the day, it was common to require militia participants to provide their own weapons. Furthermore, you can't have a militia without an armed citizenry. So naturally, the right of the people to keep and bear arms is a prerequisite for any function of the militia.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Eagleville, Pennsylvania
    (Montgomery County)
    Posts
    902
    Rep Power
    235917

    Default Re: New (to me) interpretation of the 2A

    Quote Originally Posted by Chainsaw View Post
    Interesting, but it ignores the 18th century meaning of "well regulated." Most modern gun grabbers use it the same way, whereas it's original meaning was more along the lines of "well trained."

    ..and the Constitution doesn't GIVE rights to anyone.

    This. I believe the earliest Oxford version defiens regulated in a military sense to "in good working order".
    "If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom ... go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels nor arms. May your chains set lightly upon you and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen." Samuel Adams

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Thornhill, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    100
    Rep Power
    27

    Default Re: New (to me) interpretation of the 2A

    Actually, "well-regulated" meant equipped according to a standard.

    regulation - prescribed by or according to regulation; "regulation army equipment"
    NRA, IDPA, Tactical Pistol Instructor

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Newtown Square, Pennsylvania
    (Delaware County)
    Posts
    896
    Rep Power
    8682

    Default Re: New (to me) interpretation of the 2A

    Quote Originally Posted by wa3ra View Post
    There were two main schools of thought in the early days of the republic; yours is along the lines of 'A well-regulated militia being required...', 'the right of the PEOPLE shall not be infringed...'

    In other words, a sovereign state has need of a militia, but the armed populace can keep the militia (and by extension, the government) in check.

    The other school of thought, probably more accurate, is that THE PEOPLE 'ARE' the militia.

    The end result is more or less the same; the ultimate power of firearms should rest in the hands of THE PEOPLE.
    The militia is defined fairly clearly in the constitution.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Newtown Square, Pennsylvania
    (Delaware County)
    Posts
    896
    Rep Power
    8682

    Default Re: New (to me) interpretation of the 2A

    Quote Originally Posted by V65Magnafan View Post
    Actually, "well-regulated" meant equipped according to a standard.

    regulation - prescribed by or according to regulation; "regulation army equipment"
    Not according to this fairly well researched argument.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: March 18th, 2008, 06:44 PM
  2. Need interpretation of PA UFA
    By jerkin in forum General
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: December 13th, 2007, 12:46 PM
  3. Your Law Interpretation?
    By sjl127 in forum General
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: September 2nd, 2007, 06:23 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •