2nd Amendment

Do you know what the 2nd Amendment actually says?

>A well REGULATED MILITIA, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

People on Sup Forums love to regurgitate the last phrase, but they fail to recognize the 2nd Amendment is purely about the militia. The militia should not be infringed, yes, as long as it's also well-regulated. It doesn't mean you as an individual have any special right to have military assault weapons.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?time_continue=9&v=Ehme7ai4C_s
youtu.be/dOPqdi_4Gb0
youtube.com/watch?v=P4zE0K22zH8
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Heller
youtube.com/watch?v=xuF571GyK6k
twitter.com/AnonBabble

>the right of the people to KEEP and BEAR arms

That alone is.enough for me to say fuck you

Fuck you and your fucking burger tier reading comprehension skills. Allow me to break that sentence down for you.

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, (In other words, a well regulated militia is needed to secure a free state)

FUCKING COMMA ,

The right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED< DESPITE NEEDING A WELL REGULATED MILITIA.

DO YOU GET IT NOW? FUCKING SAGE AND GO HANG YOURSELF!

And for good measure, anyone else thinking of replying need only look at the thumbnail to see JIDF shareblue written all over this thread. Sage again.

In 1791, a Militia was a street gang... basically.

in 1791 there was no regulation or bureaucracy like there is now.

A militia was basically a gun club or horse version of a biker gang.

The intent was that people buy guns and would organize themselves in case the British, French, or Spanish decided to invade them while the country was recovering from the Revolution.

Blackwater... militia

NRa... MILITIA

Crips and Bloods... unregulated militias engaging in illegal drug dealing and racketeering

Rent-a-cop Security: militia

Neighborhood Watch: militia

If you a member of a Neighborhood Watch program you should be able to buy automatic weapons. You are an organized militia that is looking after your community.

So the 4th amendment only applies to militas as well? Good to know the cops will no longer need warrants.

>1 post by this ID

OF COURSE

The SCOTUS, who are in charge of interpreting the Constitution, disagree with you.

>the people
>keep
>bear

What did they mean by this?

> WELL regulated
Regulated by the people. If they wanted the government to regulate it would say “poorly regulated”

First of we don’t have access to military assault weapons. That’s a lie you keep repeating. The military has full auto and 3 round burst. We can only shoot as fast as our finger allows us too.

Second, every weapon is an assult weapon. We don’t carry knives, guns, bats, tazers, etc to tickle each other with, fucking idiot.

Again, you’re just using combination of meaningless or outright incorrect words to try to prove a point that you can’t win.

It's not up for your interpretation you homo. And that's not how the system interprets it.

You skip social studies in 7th grade? Or just a foreigner? Probably both.

Read a good amount of literature from the 1700s, and then try reading it again. Your emphasis is wrong because you're a brainlet, or whoever wrote this pasta is a brainlet.

I know you are too retarded to realize this, but when you were 17, you received a letter from the United States Office of Civil Defence in the mail requiring you to sign it and return it for what is called "Selective Service". This is what is called the "Reserve" or "Organized" militia. Every American man between the age of 17 - 45 is in a militia, and can be called to pick up a rifle under threat of execution for cowardice.

Let me guess. You are a beaner, or a woman.

Do you know what the first amendment even says?

>CONGRESS shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances

People on Sup Forums love to regurgitate the last phrase, but they fail to recognize the first amendment is purely about congress. Yes, the congress may not pass laws to prohibit free speech, but that doesn't mean that laws can bypass the congress.

OP doesn't know the rules of grammar.
/thread.

Heller vs DC faggot. By law every citizen is a member of a well regulated militia.

it sets up the justification for the amendment, not the condition for it, you retard.

btw, if you really want to use context, then no military weapons should be banned at all, as the people are meant to rival the governments power is tbe whole purpose of the amendment

the "well regulated militia" is encompassed by "the people" I want you to look carefully at the amendment in context of the whole constitution.

The second amendment is guaranteeing the people the right to protect themselves from a tyrannical government. This objective could not be assured by limiting the means of warfare to the government.. can you see how that would defeat the entire purpose of naming the people and the object of the right to keep and bear arms? the term;"well regulated" refers to the ability of the people to form a militia when needed by virtue of their regular practice with arms...

YOU SAY 'NO' TO MY AR-15, YOU FUCKIN' PRICK! YOU AIN'T GONNA ABLE TO SAY 'NO' TO ME WHEN I GET TO YOUR HOUSE, YOU MOTHERFUCKER!!

I'm a simple man.

frankly I don't care about the constitution. we should just shoot anyone that tries to implement gun control.

Well armed and trained civilians, gotcha.

From my cold dead hands.

"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
— George Mason, Virginia Convention on Ratification of the Constitution

Maybe you should go ask the Supreme Court about this. Its been argued thru there before. Meanwhile, read some books before you spout nonsense....

REGULATE according to old websters dictionary of 1828: "TO PUT IN GOOD ORDER. "

The point is not only to have a militia, but a damn good one. Militia purpose is to fend off oppressive government. You woudn't allow that same government to have power over that militia...unless you're a fucking idiot.

colonial militias would even beg-and-borrow common firearms in the community during a drill or muster, can't do that with today's militia because the common firearm isn't military-grade

whodathunk

Well regulated means well trained, well funded and well supplied. Retard

>bear

RUSSIA

OMG RUSSIA INTERFERED WITH THE DRAFTING OF THE CONSTITUTION!!!!!

youtube.com/watch?time_continue=9&v=Ehme7ai4C_s

>the right of the people
Who has the right in the 2nd Amendment again?

Holy fuck user, thank you. I was feeling weak and degenerate and I was going to fap because I had no motivation.
>Which would make the situation worse.
But then when I read this post it reminded me of how much I hate you. Hatred is energy. Pure energy, Pure motivation. I am going to go work out. Thanks again user.

youtu.be/dOPqdi_4Gb0

>the people
american ctiizens, as opposed to "persons" which include free non-citizens and slave, as well as one's immediate body
>keep
possess, store, own, do as one pleases with
>bear
carry while in use, whether for sport, defense, transport, or war

...

That in order for a country based on freedoms to continue to exist, the people must stay armed and be capable of making militias. This is so the people can overthrow corrupt regimes that will undoubtedly try to grab the reigns of power to siphon the wealth and well-being of free men away. This nation is called the "Great Experiment" because there's so many ways it can fail and an armed populace is one of the failsafes. Congress is also designed to be gridlocked as another failsafe, btw.

selective service registration ends after 26

congress is bound to the amendment process by article VI, things like the NFA which were never ratified by the states have no legal force

The faggots who push this narrative know that they're lying. They just don't care.
Not only they pretend to not understand basic English, not only do they ignore what James Madison has said, but the narrative that they push doesn't even make sense. It would literally make zero sense to talk about how militias need to be well regulated and then say ''the right to bear arms shall not be infringed.'' It literally makes zero sense. Even if you accept their false interpretation of the sentence, even if you ignore everything James Madison has written, there is absolutely no spin you can put on it to make the ''the right to bear arms shall not be infringed'' part go away.

There is absolutely no one alive who thinks the second amendment means:
>we need an army to be well regulated with rules and regulations, the right to bear arms shall not be infringed, btw ignore the that last part, the right to bear arms shall actually be infringed, I was only talking about not infringing on the right to bear arms for the army :D

I am the militia.

And my axe.

>people replying seriously to this obvious marxist degenerate bait

Leaf is right. These are two seperate statements.

How can you form a militia without access to weaponry?

anyone try pointing out that the Framers thought that in order for a militia to be well-regulated, that no infringement of arms should occur? It's literally THE core defining term of their idea of a WRM in the eyes of the law

This

I'm glad that you support the 2nd amendment, but it doesn't men they shall not be infringed despite needing a well regulated militia, it's saying that a well regulated militia requires the right to bear arms. The leftist will argue that the militia is a requirement for the right to bear arms, but that is backwards. It is a statement of why it is included, but it doesn't put any requirement on the right. They are basically stating that if the country is to remain free then the free citizens of that country should be armed and willing to secure their freedom with force if necessary.

shall not be infringed. God Bless America

This is correct. The leaf is retarded.

Thank you, based leaf.

Read the Federalist papers, faggot

>I PUT CAPS ON WORDS to artificially make the sentence reflow at my will

You realize that every citizen is part of the militia correct? So by and large every citizen has the right to keep and bear arms so that they can fulfill their duty if and when the time comes that the militia will be needed. In the mean time you are supposed to keep your arms and train with them.

or to supply the militia with arms, borrowed or bought, should they ever be lacking

well regulated is well trained, the militia is all adult males, arms are all weapons that a contemporary infantry would possess. read more.

Yes that is in fact a clause for the militia. Which is why it is important that we have collectors who can own hundreds of guns.

Fuck you. I'm liberal and joined the NRA today and bought a highpoint 995 (don't give me shit /k/,it's cheap and shoots reliably)

>well REGULATED
means in working order

14a, females too

>1 post by this ID

saged, don't give this nigger any more (You)s

...

Sage and report.

>NRA
REEEEEE

>Well regulated
This is in the sense of regular and orderly, not legislated

redpills on /k/ are /k/ memes, accept no substitutes

S-so if we form a militia leftists will let us keep our guns now? I don't believe them

youtube.com/watch?v=P4zE0K22zH8

Let me be the first to point out that "regulated" means "well-functioning" in the historical context. Also, the first part of the sentence is giving the reason for the second part... so even if you were correct, it would only mean that a """regulated""" militia is the reason to keep and bear arms.

Sage

>means "well-functioning" in the historical context

Nope. Where do you get that idea from? Regulation is a thing that people or things do to people or other things. Armies and police forces are well regulated but can still be shite.

Historically military forces were well disciplined and but still spent most of their time running away. The word you are failing to understand is;

>militia

That means just the same as it did in the Renaissance. It is a non-professional military force composed of local residents. The reason militias sort of used to work is because they were fighting for their homes, families and livelihoods because they don’t have a choice. They live there and there was nowhere to run. Mercenaries are unreliable, standing armies are too expensive so people had to protect themselves.

The lack of historically knowledge in the United States is genuinely alarming. The reason militias never worked in the US is because you need a navy and on land people can and did used to run away from warfare.

Also the writers have given later clarification, along the lines of "who is the militia? The people"

THE POINT OF THE SECOND AMENDMENT WAS SO THE PEOPLE COULD PROTECT THEMSELVES, NOT FROM EACH OTHER, BUT FROM A TYRANNICAL GOVT. YOU FUCKING IDIOT.
Saged

What he said. The word REGULATED has changed. Back in the late 1700s REGULATED meant IN PROPER WORKING ORDER. For example, a well regulated ship would be seaworthy with all its sails in good condition.

>Also the writers have given later clarification

Magazine articles are not the law.

>who is the militia

People who live in the area and are willing and able to fight.

>The people

Nope. That won’t do will it. Nobody ever thought that ever. A militia is drawn from the populous just like a choir or a sports team, people who voluntarily come together to perform coordinated action.

Nobody would ever think that the general population are a militia. The general population in the US is old, fat and sickly. The firearm owning population is full of psychos.

Please please please make this your number one election issue, Demfag

>arguing with retards

Just sage and ignore this obvious bait.

point of fact, given that the militia ought to be armed and equipped to fight conventional wars of defense at or above the level of the US Armed Forces, the ATF can't legally tax (NFA, GCA, and associated laws are illegal anyways) anyone purchasing Automatics, especially things like M2s and M240s for the purpose of provision of arms to militia units in need, namely militia units you're involved with

It would also strongly imply anyone in possession of made or remade automatics or parts to effect the construction or conversion would be within the law provided they do so for such a purpose.

You're a fucking moron. Fuck this slide thread, and fuck you. Die.

Militia is all able bodies aged 17-45 thanks to the Dick Act and the 14th Amendment, they may be called up any time as part of the Reserve Militia and ought to be pre-emptively trained and armed to effect a speed and successful defense from where they muster to where they are deployed

fuck yourself, bong

...

Its actually not because there are these grammatical parts to speech known as commas that separate clauses and if you notice, there is a comma right at the part where it says "The right of the people," separating that from the rest of it.

So bottom line here is go fuck yourself and if you want mine I suggest bringing tanks.

>People on Sup Forums love to regurgitate the last phrase, but they fail to recognize the 2nd Amendment is purely about the militia.
this.
pol is filled with illiterate pro-government pro-trump retards that have no interest in protecting the state from tyranny, in fact they welcome it.

>Militia is all able bodies aged 17-45

Bollocks. Does it include crooks and nut cases? Do they do in a militia? Then no, this is wrong isn’t it? Fucking imbecile.

>thanks to the Dick Act

After the fact. Bollocks. Stop posting.

>well regulated militia
>disarmed citizens
indeed you shall pick one

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Heller

>District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), is a landmark case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held, in a 5–4 decision, that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home, and that Washington, D.C.'s handgun ban and requirement that lawfully-owned rifles and shotguns be kept "unloaded and disassembled or bound by a trigger lock" violated this guarantee.

...

A well made sandwich, being necessary to the cessation of my hunger, the ingredients contained within the refrigerator shall not be removed

nut cases are not able bodies, crooks in prison are not citizens during their term of confinement, after they finish serving time they stop being crooks until they offend again, while they're out of the pen and not on probation they are as good as anyone else from the law's eyes

you're a bong, so you don't really have any concept of what liberty is

>pro-gun == pro-government
What did she mean by this?

You are so wrong
youtube.com/watch?v=xuF571GyK6k

Article VI, the pro-gun is actually the pro-gov side, everyone else against 2a is actually seditious

I AM the Militia

>in a 5–4 decision

Do they go back to the 16th century in a time machine during this ruling? Is there a magic carpet involved? No? Then shut the fuck up about how the popefucker panel voted about keeping guns locked in a box. Their opinion means fuck all about this topic.

What does this have to do with the assembly and function of a militia? Explain it to me you fucking imbecile.

Actually, don't felons lose some of their rights like 2A although they've served their sentence?

All the amendments are restriction on the power of the government which is why they detail the rights of "The People". In this case it is stating that the government has no authority to take away the right to keep and bear arms from the people and details the overall reason why, so that a militia can be formed.

The Bill of Rights is a list of rights citizens hold against the government. The government does not need to hold a right against itself. If it wants to raise an army it does not have to sue itself to do so. As an example of how bullshit your militia line of reasoning is, who would have standing to sue the government on 2nd Amendment grounds for the right to bear arms, nitwit? If you start playing the “ the Constitution doesn’t mean what it says” game you won’t like where it ends as there are plenty of less popular amendments on there.

How do commas work?

A well made burger, being necessary to the cessation of my hunger, the ingredients contained within the refrigerator shall not be removed

>What does this have to do with the assembly and function of a militia? Explain it to me you fucking imbecile.
It says that the ownership of personal weapons in the United States has nothing do with a "militia." There's no point in continuing to argue from that angle.

In context there, the 1700s word "regulated" can be parsed in modern language as "equipped".

You realize the supreme Court interprets what the constitution actually means, not some high school shitheads.
Go see how they have interpreted the 2nd ammendment.

>nut cases are not able bodies

Bollocks. Lunacy is in the head. You can be a fully functioning solder and a fruitcake, there are plenty.

>crooks in prison

And out of prison? Some gang banger on the corner who has not got caught yet? Does he go in the militia? What about wife bashers? Anyone able bodied aged 17-45 includes tens of millions of people of bad character. Do they go in the militia?

You have shit for brains. Italian peasants 400 years dead are smarter than you.