Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: servo1969
That may be but all of the early militias were authorized by government. First the local authorities and on up. The Feds even provided funding for arms, gunpowder and lead.

But all of that is beside the point here, that being that the part of the 2nd A. regarding the people's rights is not qualified by the word 'regulated.'

10 posted on 11/08/2013 6:29:06 PM PST by TigersEye (Stupid is a Progressive disease.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]


To: TigersEye

The “you’d have to be standing there” situation falls into this mess.

In the 1760-era...with the British troops part of the American scene, there wasn’t a clear rule on personal firearms in the home. So a commander could arrive with a hundred of his troops....see way too many locals with hunting guns....deem it a problem....and open a armory where you’d have to check the gun out for the day, then return it. That was the only way that the British commander felt the situation was safe for himself, the troops, and the locals.

For a military commander, this way of thinking has various reasons to enforce gun control. You didn’t have idiots running off to start some Indian conflict over a rumor which was false. And with the amount of alcohol that flowed in those days...most guys were generally a bit drunk on occasion.

The militia angle made perfect sense after the Revolutionary War and locals felt they were now in control of their guns, and could continue to run the armory business if they desired, or discontinue it if they desired.


33 posted on 11/08/2013 10:45:09 PM PST by pepsionice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson