[af_vet_1981]

The clause you quoted just limits, although admittedly not much, what they can collect taxes for.

No, it establishes that the Federal government is responsible for providing for the common defense and general welfare of all the citizens of the United States. The government is entitled to regulate which arms are available for general use and which are reserved for the Armed Forces.

[El Gato]

No, it establishes that the Federal government is responsible for providing for the common defense and general welfare of all the citizens of the United States. The government is entitled to regulate which arms are available for general use and which are reserved for the Armed Forces.

If that were true, then the second amendment would have changed it. However it's not the case, even absent the second amendment. Look down a bit farther in Art 1 Sec. 8, there you will find a power to raise aand support Armies, and a Navy. (the Air Force is just an air armie and the Marines are part of the Navy). To ratify treaties (the President, not Congress has the power to make them). All that would have been redundent if the clause you quote did what you think it does, and a basic principal of Constitutional Law is that all provisions have meaning.

Yes, the federal goverment is responsible for the external security of the coutry, and has limited authority over internal security and safety, but all that is established by other clauses of the Constitution, not the one you quote. The second amendment expressly forbids the the Federal government, and through the 14th amendment the States as well, from making such restrictions and distinctions that you say they are entitled to make with regards to the type of arms that mere peonscitizens may keep and bear. What it comes down to, is that the "right of the people" "shall not be infringed". Some, such as some state Suprme Court Justices, say that restriction applied to the states even prior to the passage of the 14th amendment. (see Nunn vs Georgia)

[dcwusmc]

NOWHERE in the Constitution for the United States does any authority get granted to the Central Government OR to the states, for that matter, that would allow them to regulate what arms are available to the public. Such authority does not exist and has only been USURPED by governments. Quite unconstitutionally. The Rights mentioned in the Bill of Rights (especially the Ninth Amendment) are not GRANTED by that marvelous document. The Founders knew that what government giveth government can taketh away. Therefore they merely required that government RECOGNIZE PRE-EXISTING rights. Which means, quite simply, that governments at all levels (of which we have WAY too many) may NOT act to restrict our God-given rights, as they could IF they were the SOURCE of such "rights." Go do your homework and report back on the Founders' intent. Two thousand words should be about right.