Quote:
|
Originally Posted by willravel
They had a well regulated militia at the time, remember? The American Revolutionaries were mostly militia. When the Revolutionary War started, we ONLY had a militia. We saw what a government run military could do in the British Army, attacking a colony despite the reasonable request for adequate representation in government. The militia was to regulate power, but it was to be organized. Whether or not the National Guard would fill the role of a counterbalance to the Army, Navy, Marines, etc. is another conversation, but it is a regulated militia.
To a gun right's advocate? Of course it sounds nonsensical to you. To me? It makes perfect sense. The language is quite clear, and it supports my conclusion. What doesn't support my conclusion would be the fact that we live in a democracy, and I don't think a gun ban would have 50%+ if put to a vote. Cest la vis.
Your welcome to your opinion. I disagree.
If I were a supreme court justice, I would do what I could to rule in what I see is the true spirit of the Amendment.
|
Go through the federalist and anti-federalist papers, the convention debates, and then go through the first 50 years of articles, editorials, and court cases to find PROOF that the framers intended the 2nd Amendent to the Bill of Rights to mean that the states had a right to maintain an armed military unit when Art. 1 Sec 10 of the constitution clearly states "No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace,".
How does that square with your interpretation that the states have a right to armed militia as protection from a central government when the constitution clearly denies them that so called right?
That would be because the PEOPLE are the militia, not the national guard, especially when the guard is federally funded, federally armed, and under federal jurisdiction at the presidents command. The 2nd Amendment is clearly an individual right so that the states have ACCESS to a well-regulated militia. The ONLY thing the states have to do with it is appoint its officers.
also, we do NOT live in a democracy...we have a representative republic to specifically avoid majority rule that would override the rights of the individual or minority.