Author
|
Topic: The Second Amendment
|
NoNukes
Inactive Member
|
Re: British despotism
The second amendment identifies an individual right to keep and bear arms which predates the US Constitition. Anyone who has read the Federalist Papers knows this. |
We know that there is an individual right to bear arms present in the second amendment. The questions are, the scope and purpose of the individual right, the application of that right to the states, and the level of constitutional scrutiny required for federal and state laws which affect or limit personal rights on guns. In other words, what guns, maintained how, and carried when? I'd be interested in discussing the federalist papers. For example in this often quote mined statement from James Madison, it seems clear that the right to bear arms is closely related to the benefits of having a state militia, with state officials in charge. Why is so obvious that Madison's statement is inconsistent with the state having the right to pass gun control laws.. quote: Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. And it is not certain, that with this aid alone they would not be able to shake off their yokes. But were the people to possess the additional advantages of local governments chosen by themselves, who could collect the national will and direct the national force, and of officers appointed out of the militia, by these governments, and attached both to them and to the militia, it may be affirmed with the greatest assurance, that the throne of every tyranny in Europe would be speedily overturned in spite of the legions which surround it.
Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison
This message is a reply to: | | Message 33 by petrophysics1, posted 08-04-2012 9:41 AM | | petrophysics1 has not yet responded |
Replies to this message: | | Message 47 by crashfrog, posted 08-05-2012 6:54 PM | | NoNukes has responded |
|
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 211 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: 03-20-2003
|
|
Message 47 of 51 (669907)
08-05-2012 6:54 PM
|
Reply to: Message 46 by NoNukes 08-05-2012 2:07 PM
|
|
Re: British despotism
For example in this often quote mined statement from James Madison, it seems clear that the right to bear arms is closely related to the benefits of having a state militia, with state officials in charge. |
I don't get that from the quote, I guess, so "clear" seems a bit of an overstatement. This seems to be Madison affirming that widespread arms ownership by the people would "speedily overturn" the despotic thrones of Europe (or, presumably, anywhere else.) The precise view so recently lampooned by some here. I don't see any support, here, for the notion that the right to arms is something Madison viewed as appropriate only for militia members. The view implied here, it seems, isn't that militia membership should be a pre-requisite for the ownership of arms, but that the popular ownership of arms is a prerequisite for being able to form a militia.
This message is a reply to: | | Message 46 by NoNukes, posted 08-05-2012 2:07 PM | | NoNukes has responded |
Replies to this message: | | Message 48 by NoNukes, posted 08-06-2012 12:40 PM | | crashfrog has not yet responded |
|
NoNukes
Inactive Member
|
|
Message 48 of 51 (669931)
08-06-2012 12:40 PM
|
Reply to: Message 47 by crashfrog 08-05-2012 6:54 PM
|
|
Re: British despotism
"clear" seems a bit of an overstatement |
Fair enough. The view implied here, it seems, isn't that militia membership should be a pre-requisite for the ownership of arms, but that the popular ownership of arms is a prerequisite for being able to form a militia. |
Yes, but even that would tie the right to bear arms closely to the benefits of having a state militia. The precise view so recently lampooned by some here |
Not quite. The idea lampooned here is that the purpose of the 2nd amendment was to empower individuals or small groups would take on the federal government and that such a need justifies individuals having matching fire power at home. Some people even expressed the idea that democracy could not exist without this matching power. Jon expanded on that idea to argue that the Wilmington Massacre was democracy in action. Those ideas are quite a bit different from a state militia using officers trained by the state of South Carolina to organize a resistance. Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison
This message is a reply to: | | Message 47 by crashfrog, posted 08-05-2012 6:54 PM | | crashfrog has not yet responded |
|
dronestar
Member Posts: 1384 From: usa Joined: 11-19-2008
|
|
Message 49 of 51 (883711)
01-08-2021 12:23 AM
|
Reply to: Message 15 by Straggler 08-03-2012 9:20 AM
|
|
Re: Who Do We Need to Protect Democracy From?
STRAG writes: Frankly if democracy is ever forcibly eliminated in the US it won't be by the government. It will be eliminated by a mass of gun nuts who decide that the elected government isn't white, homophobic or right wing enough for their tastes...... |
Straggler prophesized that in 2012. M'eh, . . . lucky guess.
This message is a reply to: | | Message 15 by Straggler, posted 08-03-2012 9:20 AM | | Straggler has responded |
Replies to this message: | | Message 50 by jar, posted 01-08-2021 7:35 AM | | dronestar has not yet responded | | Message 51 by Straggler, posted 01-08-2021 8:27 AM | | dronestar has not yet responded |
|
jar
Member Posts: 33102 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004 Member Rating: 3.7
|
|
Message 50 of 51 (883715)
01-08-2021 7:35 AM
|
Reply to: Message 49 by dronestar 01-08-2021 12:23 AM
|
|
Re: Who Do We Need to Protect Democracy From?
Fortunately there are also a VERY large liberal/progressive group that are also gun owners. Speaking of guns, this lock down/hibernation period has let me give SPA Days to many of my less often used firearms. It's been fun.
This message is a reply to: | | Message 49 by dronestar, posted 01-08-2021 12:23 AM | | dronestar has not yet responded |
|
Straggler
Member Posts: 10328 From: London England Joined: 09-30-2006
|
|
Message 51 of 51 (883716)
01-08-2021 8:27 AM
|
Reply to: Message 49 by dronestar 01-08-2021 12:23 AM
|
|
Re: Who Do We Need to Protect Democracy From?
Blimey. That’s a blast from the past. But yeah. The Tea Party lot as it was then or the MAGA mob mob as it is now - These are the dangerous misguided zealots who, righteous in their perverted patriotism as they are, would be most likely to take the US from democracy to despotism. Fortunately the US does seem to have survived the test of Trump with democracy intact. But it’s a reminder to us all of how these things can occur.
This message is a reply to: | | Message 49 by dronestar, posted 01-08-2021 12:23 AM | | dronestar has not yet responded |
|