Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: LdSentinal
actually, if you really believe in the intent of the writers of the second amendment, the right to keep and bear arms is for the men, who at that time were private citizens, who would come forth in times of emergency, and it was necessary for them to keep military weapons on hand for such times. Which means we should all be REQUIRED to keep assault weapons and automatic weapons on hand, "just in case", it is a sign of the times.
2 posted on 07/05/2003 10:49:02 PM PDT by rontorr (It's just my opinion, but I am RIGHT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: rontorr
if you really believe in the intent of the writers of the second amendment, the right to keep and bear arms is for the men, who at that time were private citizens, who would come forth in times of emergency, and it was necessary for them to keep military weapons on hand for such times. Which means we should all be REQUIRED to keep assault weapons and automatic weapons on hand, "just in case", it is a sign of the times.

No, that was already covered in the militia clauses of the original body of the Constitution. Congress was given the power to provide for arming the militia and for providing "discipline" (which meant the drill manuals and such). They were also given the power to make the rules for governing that part of the militia called into actual federal service. The President is commander in chief of that portion of the militia called in to actual service, and the Supreme Court has jurisdicition over matters involving the militia, when in actual federal service.

The Second Amendment was to ensure that the militia could be armed, even if Congress and/or the States failled to arm them. In the "pre-amble" of the second amendment, "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a FREE state" (emphasis added). the operative word is "FREE". (by state they did not only mean one of the several States, but a government in general.)

Furthermore they not only wanted to ensure that the militia would be armed "Just in case" of insurrection or foreign invasion, but to prevent the government from disarming the milita for it's own, that is the government's, "security", should it overstep its Constitutional bounds.

6 posted on 07/05/2003 11:07:08 PM PDT by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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