well regulated

[BobbyT]

What does the adverb 'well' mean in the 2nd amendment mean? What does 'regulated' mean? What does 'militia' mean?

 

[Dino]

What does the adverb 'well' mean in the 2nd amendment mean? What does 'regulated' mean? What does 'militia' mean?

You'll find your (disappointing) answer in the case law on cases deciding the 2nd Amendment.
Happy hunting.
But condolences, you already lost this fight.

 

[RickWA]

You'll find your (disappointing) answer in the case law on cases deciding the 2nd Amendment.
Happy hunting.
But condolences, you already lost this fight.

I look forward to the authoritarian statist lefties similarly parsing "keep and bear" arms.

Any chance that they'll want to interpret that to mean a right to carry?

Nahhh...

 

[Constitutional Sheepdog]

What does the adverb 'well' mean in the 2nd amendment mean? What does 'regulated' mean? What does 'militia' mean?

Well Regulated in the context it was written in 1792 did not mean what it means today.
In 1792 well regulated meant in working order as to be expected

The Militia
George Mason is known as the father of the bill of rights it was his belief that the people were the militia

"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."

Bear Arms

 

[Dino]

I look forward to the authoritarian statist lefties similarly parsing "keep and bear" arms.

Any chance that they'll want to interpret that to mean a right to carry?

Nahhh...

They may wish to interpret it literally and allow us to carry ursine appendages only? Moonbat crazy enough?

 

[RickWA]

They may wish to interpret it literally and allow us to carry ursine appendages only? Moonbat crazy enough?

Well...you see what these loons do with "promote the general welfare".

Lunatics.

They seek to hack away at very specific enumerated rights, they enthusiastically champion "penumbras" and "emanations" from the "right to privacy", etc.

All kinds of crazy.

 

[oicu812]

well it was decided in court years ago the "right to bear arms" is an INDIVIDUAL right not dependent upon membership in any group.

anything else?

 

[write on]

Well Regulated in the context it was written in 1792 did not mean what it means today.
In 1792 well regulated meant in working order as to be expected

The Militia
George Mason is known as the father of the bill of rights it was his belief that the people were the militia

Bear Arms

Oh, you mean like the National Guard, right?

 

[BobbyT]

You'll find your (disappointing) answer in the case law on cases deciding the 2nd Amendment.
Happy hunting.
But condolences, you already lost this fight.

So you don't know what the definitions are?

 

[BobbyT]

I look forward to the authoritarian statist lefties similarly parsing "keep and bear" arms.

Any chance that they'll want to interpret that to mean a right to carry?

Nahhh...

I'd like to know what you think the definitions of those words are. We already know the conservative supreme court chose to ignore them.

 

[write on]

What does the adverb 'well' mean in the 2nd amendment mean? What does 'regulated' mean? What does 'militia' mean?

We recognize December 13th as the birthday of the National Guard. On this date in 1636, the first militia regiments in North America were organized in Massachusetts. Based upon an order of the Massachusetts Bay Colony's General Court, the colony's militia was organized into three permanent regiments to better defend the colony. Today, the descendants of these first regiments - the 181st Infantry, the 182nd Infantry, the 101st Field Artillery, and the 101st Engineer Battalion of the Massachusetts Army National Guard – share the distinction of being the oldest units in the U.S. military. December 13, 1636, thus marks the beginning of the organized militia, and the birth of the National Guard's oldest organized units is symbolic of the founding of all the state, territory, and District of Columbia militias that collectively make up today's National Guard.

http://www.nationalguard.mil/AbouttheGuard/HowWeBegan.aspx

 

[BobbyT]

Well Regulated in the context it was written in 1792 did not mean what it means today.
In 1792 well regulated meant in working order as to be expected

The Militia
George Mason is known as the father of the bill of rights it was his belief that the people were the militia

Bear Arms

The definitions of well, regulated, and militia have not changed. What do you believe each word means? If 'the people' were the militia, in what way are they well regulated?

 

[BobbyT]

well it was decided in court years ago the "right to bear arms" is an INDIVIDUAL right not dependent upon membership in any group.

anything else?

Supreme court decisions can be, and have been, overturned.

 

[oicu812]

Supreme court decisions can be, and have been, overturned.

thats common knowledge...

in the mean time,,your outta gas...

 

[Dino]

So you don't know what the definitions are?

"Definitions" are in a dictionary.
You want to know a definition, that's easy to look up.

You want to understand case law and Supreme Court decisions that have been handed down. This is best explained the way interested people have done it for decades- read it.

The interpretations of the 2nd amendment are found in certain cases. Look them up and you'll see that "militia" does not refer to state-run groups, but is interpreted as "the people".

Look into it.

 

[write on]

Supreme court decisions can be, and have been, overturned.

Scalia:

“Some undoubtedly are [permissible] because there were some that were acknowledged at the time” the Constitution was written, Scalia said. He cited a practice from that era known as “frighting,” where people “carried around a really horrible weapon just to scare people, like a head axe or something. That was, I believe, a misdemeanor.”

“So yes, there are some limitations that can be imposed,” Scalia said. “What they are will depend on what the society understood were reasonable limitations at the time.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/29/antonin-scalia-guns_n_1715969.html

 

[RickWA]

I'd like to know what you think the definitions of those words are. We already know the conservative supreme court chose to ignore them.

There is no "conservative Supreme Court".

What I think the definition of those words are?

In a nutshell, if a thing is an enumerated right - be careful as heck to touch any aspect of it. If a thing is not an enumerated right, caution is still prudent...but the standard for interference or regulation is considerably lower.

I have a concealed carry permit and I live in Oregon. I've done the coursework and have obtained concealed carry for the states of Oregon, Arizona, and Utah - because, for whatever reason, that particular combination of states offers interstate reciprocity that allows me to carry in a majority of the states.

Guess what I've done with that?

Nothing.

And it's not just because my preferred handgun is S&W 686+ (pretty big to conceal/carry).

It's because I don't feel the need to carry. It's a right. I have that ability "in my pocket". I'm a big guy, comparatively athletic, and - frankly - I think I could rush/disarm many (if needed). I'm not a fearful person.

So, where does all of this leave us? Heck if I know. I'm no gun "extremist". Guns don't scare me. Fellow citizens having gun rights doesn't scare me. Neither terrorist nutcases nor thug criminals scare me.

A nation of sheep which are readily stampeded into surrendering their rights under the thumb of an increasingly controlling authoritarian government? Well, that doesn't "scare me", but it's a point of concern.

Our citizens are increasingly idiotic (in my humble opinion).

 

[Abatis]

I'd like to know what you think the definitions of those words are. We already know the conservative supreme court chose to ignore them.

The Court has been boringly consistent for 140 years.

The right to keep and bear arms is not granted, given, created or otherwise established by the 2nd Amendment thus it is not in any manner dependent on the words of the Constitution for its existence.

That means the words of the 2nd can not be legitimately read to modify / condition / qualify / restrict the right.

 

[Abatis]

The definitions of well, regulated, and militia have not changed. What do you believe each word means? If 'the people' were the militia, in what way are they well regulated?

Federalist 29 explains it:

"The project of disciplining all the militia of the United States is as futile as it would be injurious, if it were capable of being carried into execution. A tolerable expertness in military movements is a business that requires time and practice. It is not a day, or even a week, that will suffice for the attainment of it. To oblige the great body of the yeomanry, and of the other classes of the citizens, to be under arms for the purpose of going through military exercises and evolutions, as often as might be necessary to acquire the degree of perfection which would entitle them to the character of a well-regulated militia, would be a real grievance to the people, and a serious public inconvenience and loss. It would form an annual deduction from the productive labor of the country, to an amount which, calculating upon the present numbers of the people, would not fall far short of the whole expense of the civil establishments of all the States. To attempt a thing which would abridge the mass of labor and industry to so considerable an extent, would be unwise: and the experiment, if made, could not succeed, because it would not long be endured. Little more can reasonably be aimed at, with respect to the people at large, than to have them properly armed and equipped; and in order to see that this be not neglected, it will be necessary to assemble them once or twice in the course of a year."​

 

[RickWA]

Scalia:

“Some undoubtedly are [permissible] because there were some that were acknowledged at the time” the Constitution was written, Scalia said. He cited a practice from that era known as “frighting,” where people “carried around a really horrible weapon just to scare people, like a head axe or something. That was, I believe, a misdemeanor.”

“So yes, there are some limitations that can be imposed,” Scalia said. “What they are will depend on what the society understood were reasonable limitations at the time.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/29/antonin-scalia-guns_n_1715969.html

Classic example which illustrates why those who embrace our constitution must rehearse the simple answer of "no".

Give a fraction of a millimeter, and authoritarian statist lefty goes whole-hog and takes a mile (although he does so delicately...with "jazz hands").

Heh.