Reply to SBX 16, is there no middle ground for gun control?

Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics

Reply to "SBX 16, is there no middle ground for gun control?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Or maybe the problem is that when any gun control proposal is brought up people immediately jump to arguing that it bans or will lead in short order to a ban on every possible form of gun ownership, including antique guns with bayonet mounting. [/quote]

Well, how can you blame people for thinking that way? Especially when you remember what Pete Shields, the founder of what later became the Brady group, said:
[b]"No private citizen has any legitimate reason to possess any type of firearm whatsoever."[/b][/quote]

Absolutely, positively 100% correct.

[b][u]The second amendment granted "the militia" the right to possess arms. Not you. Not me. The militia[/u].[/b] In other words, the military. Or the national guard. Or the police. It is not an individual right for each person in the way that speech, religion, self incrimination, etc are. It's a right established and reserved for the collective (ie the militia, the government, the state), but it just happened to be included amongst other rights prescribed to individuals. That's the source of confusion here. The other nine amendments in the BoR are for the individual, except for the second amendment, which is for the militia.

It's a mistake, among many, made by the white male slave owners who wrote it. [/quote]

Reading comprehension is evidently not your strong point. The militia is mentioned only in the prefatory clause of the 2nd amendment. That clause states the reason for the amendment. The second clause is what the amendment is all about. In it, the framers of the constitution clearly referred to THE PEOPLE, not the militia. The same wording is used in the 1st, and 4th amendments. The 10th amendment clearly shows that the framers differentiated between the United States, the individual states, and the people. If the framers of the constitution meant that the right to keep and bear arms was reserved for the states or to the militia, they would have said so. The amendment would have read, "...the right of the militia to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed", or, "...the right of the states to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." But they didn't do that. They gave that right to the people, not to the states or to me militia. And I think you know that. You hate it, but you know it's true.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics