We should not even waste our time trying to
quibble over what the founders intended. They left us quite a volume of work and it states clearly their intent. Simply, they wanted an armed citizenry out of distrust for a centralized government. Every time I hear some putz arguing about the founders intent and spinning it to mean only government-regulated forces, I nearly blow my stack. He should do one of two things first…open up a history book or stop fucking distorting the truth on purpose.
If you want to ban the private ownership of arms, just leave the founders out of it.
What the gun-ban movement is left with is the “different world” argument. Like Justice Souter has been all-to-happy to point out, the founders never envisioned TV, the internet and so on(to be fair, I don’t think they envisioned socialists or even outright commies running around our great country either). Yep, weapons are different today than they were in 1783. I can’t argue that. So what? The Constitution was written for posterity, not just for a few decades.
While I give the founders great credit as some of the most brilliant thinkers ever to walk the planet, I know some don’t share my view. How hard would it have been for Madison to include the caveat “the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed until such time as the technology of arms becomes too sophisticated for the people to be trusted with”? No qualifier was given for a reason. Sitting here in 2006, I can imagine that weaponry and arms will be very different 200 hundred years from now. However, you know what won’t change? There will still be criminals who want to harm you, America will still have enemies in the world who would love nothing more than to invade our homeland
and a government can’t become all-powerful if its people can defend themselves and their God-given rights.
Here are a couple of common beliefs among the pro-gun crowd. If you are anti-gun, tell me what you see as being wrong with the following, as they all seem like common sense to me:
1.The right to self-defense is absolute.
A government that seeks to remove your right to self defense should be abolished or overturned by force(Britain, take note). No government can provide for your individual safety as well as you can. I should know as I am a law enforcement officer. Besides, a total ban on guns and 100 million gun laws
would not stop the bad guys from doing whatever they want. I know this for a fact too.
2.No centralized government should be allowed to become too powerful. The most powerful central governments are where?..Communist countries. And what do they do first? Disarm the sheep because they can’t be trusted. Then they do all kinds of nasty things like re-educate you, seize your property or
simply kill you for disagreeing. Like it or not, an armed citizenry is a shield against tyranny.
3.America was made great by trusting its citizens and its citizens distrusting its government.
I wasn’t distorting the truth. I’m against for gun control but certainly against gun bans. I think you need to open a history book and realize the question of what the Amendment means or meant is up to interpretation.
As I said before I’m not for gun bans. I think if you look at it objectively you can’t be sure if the Second Amendment necessarily applies to ALL INDIVIDUALS. That’s why I argued that right could be found in the Ninth Amendment (borrow a copy of the Constitution from someone who has read it).
Don’t blow your stack too soon just make sure you are being objective and trying to actually understand things, not just make conclusory statements.
I wasnt talking to you specifically. I hadnt even read your post. Do you have some kind of a guilty conscience?
I have read the Constitution umpteen times. The whole damn thing is open to interpretation and I didnt say otherwise.
I did say the founders beliefs are clear and the right to keep and bear arms applies to individuals.
“That the said Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms.”
“The great object is, that every man be armed…Every one who is able may have a gun.”
“No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.”
One could go on forever, but how is any of that unclear?
I defy anyone to produce evidence that the founders intended the right to keep and bear arms to be ONLY a collective right. You won’t find it because it doesn’t exist. It would be more productive for gun control advocates to move on and try to develop another avenue of attack. These constant distortions are one of the many reasons no one should take them seriously.
None of those men you mentioned attended the Constitutional Convention, they may be founders of the country but are NOT FRAMERS of the Constitution. If you had read the Constitution the names of those who attended should be listed in the back. Thus, their quotes have ZERO bearing on the Second Amendment. Read LBRTRN’s responses to the thread that’s why he quotes James Madison, because he is the father of the Constitution and actually was there.
Your philosophical arguments about what a government should and shouldn’t do, and self defense etc. don’t mean much as far as the Second Amendment is concerned they are clearly your ideas that cloud any objective view you could take towards the Constitution.
There is at the very least an equal amount of evidence that the law only applies to state militias, as there is that the law applies to individual citizens.
The Second Amendment can be interpreted to apply collectively that is argument enough. That’s why there was a discussion going on until you came and starting talking in absolutes, calling people who look at things objectively liars.