[StJacques]

"Learn history. "Back in the day", private individuals and institutions were allowed to do EXACTLY that. . . ."

Local militias were only permitted to acquire artillery pieces once they organized and placed themselves under state control, although the order in which these aspects of the "legal" scenario often occurred was less than perfect. But private citizens were not permitted to "bear" such arms by themselves.

And yes; those private sailing ships were well-armed and a logical argument probably can be made that this is evidence of unrestricted access to arms. But I would respond that that goes a bit far.

The 2nd Amendment says "well-regulated." That must have had some meaning to the framers, otherwise they would not have put it in.

[JamesP81]

That must have had some meaning to the framers, otherwise they would not have put it in.

I'm sure it did mean something. What it DID NOT mean was that the militia answered to any elected or appointed government official. In the legal tradition of the Founders, any military force under government authority was a standing army. Period. This includes today's National Guard.

[Wonder Warthog]

"Local militias were only permitted to acquire artillery pieces once they organized and placed themselves under state control, although the order in which these aspects of the "legal" scenario often occurred was less than perfect. But private citizens were not permitted to "bear" such arms by themselves."

Please provide proof. I'm not aware of any such regulations, and I've read a LOT in this area. Even as late as the civil war, it wasn't unusual for (say) a plantation owner to buy the cannon for his local militia--but HE owned the cannon.

"And yes; those private sailing ships were well-armed and a logical argument probably can be made that this is evidence of unrestricted access to arms. But I would respond that that goes a bit far.

And you would be wrong. History says otherwise. Unfortunately for your position, between the Revolutionary War and up until the civil war, if you could afford to buy it, you could own it.

"The 2nd Amendment says "well-regulated." That must have had some meaning to the framers, otherwise they would not have put it in."

It did---it meant "well-trained". See "regulated" as in "regulation of a clock's movement". The bane of Washington's existence was the poor training of his militia elements. It wasn't until von Steuben showed up that they were "trained up" to an acceptable standard.

What the Founding Fathers were trying to accomplish is easy to ascertain from history---the only folks who would have you think otherwise are those that want to ban firearms.