Would you be willing to accept this Second Amendment compromise?

[danielpalos]

it is clearly about what is necessary to the security of a a free State.

So? What's your point? It's a right and not a law. The founders recognized our rights as natural and NOT to be granted by governmental entities. IOW, our rights existed long before any governments were created by men.

no dear, it is not about Individual rights, but about the security of a free State and what is necessary to achieve that End.

Now, I as well as others have indeed posted the Federalist papers here on this very thread, I believe. Did you just ignore them so that you can continue on with your nonsensical rants?

dear, the federalist papers support my contention, not yours.

That's a lie. Where do they support your contention? Quote the section and link to it please.

dear, you are the one that claims otherwise; cite yours.

 

[ChrisL]

So? What's your point? It's a right and not a law. The founders recognized our rights as natural and NOT to be granted by governmental entities. IOW, our rights existed long before any governments were created by men.

no dear, it is not about Individual rights, but about the security of a free State and what is necessary to achieve that End.

Now, I as well as others have indeed posted the Federalist papers here on this very thread, I believe. Did you just ignore them so that you can continue on with your nonsensical rants?

dear, the federalist papers support my contention, not yours.

That's a lie. Where do they support your contention? Quote the section and link to it please.

dear, you are the one that claims otherwise; cite yours.

I just did, idiot.

 

[danielpalos]

it is clearly about what is necessary to the security of a a free State.

So? What's your point? It's a right and not a law. The founders recognized our rights as natural and NOT to be granted by governmental entities. IOW, our rights existed long before any governments were created by men.

no dear, it is not about Individual rights, but about the security of a free State and what is necessary to achieve that End.

Now, I as well as others have indeed posted the Federalist papers here on this very thread, I believe. Did you just ignore them so that you can continue on with your nonsensical rants?

dear, the federalist papers support my contention, not yours.

I can quote and link to sections that support my statements. Can you?

The Founding Fathers on the Second Amendment

“A militia when properly formed are in fact the people themselves… and include all men capable of bearing arms. . . To preserve liberty it is essential that the whole body of people always possess arms… The mind that aims at a select militia, must be influenced by a truly anti-republican principle.” – Letters From the Federal Farmer to the Republican, Letter XVIII, January 25, 1788

“(W)hereas, to preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them nor does it follow from this, that all promiscuously must go into actual service on every occasion. The mind that aims at a select militia, must be influenced by a truly anti-republican principle and when we see many men disposed to practice upon it, whenever they can prevail, no wonder true republicans are for carefully guarding against it.” – Federal Farmer, Anti-Federalist Letter, No.18, The Pennsylvania Gazette, February 20, 1788

“No free government was ever founded, or ever preserved its liberty, without uniting the characters of the citizen and soldier in those destined for the defense of the state…such area well-regulated militia, composed of the freeholders, citizen and husbandman, who take up arms to preserve their property, as individuals, and their rights as freemen.” – Richard Henry Lee, State Gazette (Charleston), September 8, 1788

dear, all of those authors support my contention that there are no Individual rights with the terms, militia and the People.

 

[danielpalos]

no dear, it is not about Individual rights, but about the security of a free State and what is necessary to achieve that End.

Now, I as well as others have indeed posted the Federalist papers here on this very thread, I believe. Did you just ignore them so that you can continue on with your nonsensical rants?

dear, the federalist papers support my contention, not yours.

That's a lie. Where do they support your contention? Quote the section and link to it please.

dear, you are the one that claims otherwise; cite yours.

I just did, idiot.

no dear, you didn't. you merely claimed you did, like all of the other ones.

 

[ChrisL]

So? What's your point? It's a right and not a law. The founders recognized our rights as natural and NOT to be granted by governmental entities. IOW, our rights existed long before any governments were created by men.

no dear, it is not about Individual rights, but about the security of a free State and what is necessary to achieve that End.

Now, I as well as others have indeed posted the Federalist papers here on this very thread, I believe. Did you just ignore them so that you can continue on with your nonsensical rants?

dear, the federalist papers support my contention, not yours.

I can quote and link to sections that support my statements. Can you?

The Founding Fathers on the Second Amendment

“A militia when properly formed are in fact the people themselves… and include all men capable of bearing arms. . . To preserve liberty it is essential that the whole body of people always possess arms… The mind that aims at a select militia, must be influenced by a truly anti-republican principle.” – Letters From the Federal Farmer to the Republican, Letter XVIII, January 25, 1788

“(W)hereas, to preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them nor does it follow from this, that all promiscuously must go into actual service on every occasion. The mind that aims at a select militia, must be influenced by a truly anti-republican principle and when we see many men disposed to practice upon it, whenever they can prevail, no wonder true republicans are for carefully guarding against it.” – Federal Farmer, Anti-Federalist Letter, No.18, The Pennsylvania Gazette, February 20, 1788

“No free government was ever founded, or ever preserved its liberty, without uniting the characters of the citizen and soldier in those destined for the defense of the state…such area well-regulated militia, composed of the freeholders, citizen and husbandman, who take up arms to preserve their property, as individuals, and their rights as freemen.” – Richard Henry Lee, State Gazette (Charleston), September 8, 1788

dear, all of those authors support my contention that there are no Individual rights with the terms, militia and the People.

I don't think you know how to read or comprehend what you are reading. Clearly, the intention is that every able-bodied American would be a part of the "militia" and that men have the right to bear arms for self defense. Shall I bold it for you? Maybe that would lessen your confusion and make it more simple for you to understand what it is you are reading?


such area well-regulated militia, composed of the freeholders, citizen and husbandman, who take up arms to preserve their property, as individuals, and their rights as freemen.” – Richard Henry Lee, State Gazette (Charleston), September 8, 1788

 

[ChrisL]

Now, I as well as others have indeed posted the Federalist papers here on this very thread, I believe. Did you just ignore them so that you can continue on with your nonsensical rants?

dear, the federalist papers support my contention, not yours.

That's a lie. Where do they support your contention? Quote the section and link to it please.

dear, you are the one that claims otherwise; cite yours.

I just did, idiot.

no dear, you didn't. you merely claimed you did, like all of the other ones.

Wrong as usual. I quoted it again in post #485. Now, try acting your age and not your shoe size and address the quote.

 

[ChrisL]

“False is the idea of utility that sacrifices a thousand real advantages for one imaginary or trifling inconvenience; that would take fire from men because it burns, and water because one may drown in it; that has no remedy for evils, except destruction. Laws that forbid the carrying of arms laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.… Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they act rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.” – Quoting Cesare Beccaria, On Crimes and Punishment

“No freeman shall be debarred the use of arms [within his own lands].” – Proposed Constitution for Virginia – Fair Copy, Section IV:Rights, Private and Public, June 1776; The Works of Thomas Jefferson, Federal Edition, Editor: Paul Leicester Ford, (New York and London, G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1904-5); Vol. 2

“A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercise, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball and others of that nature are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be the constant companion of your walks.” – Letter to Peter Carr, 1785; The Letters of Thomas Jefferson: 1743-1826, Electronic Text Center of University of Virginia

“[W]hat country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms.” – Letter to William Stephens Smith, November 13, 1787; The Works of Thomas Jefferson, Federal Edition (New York and London, G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1904-5) Vol. 5

“The constitutions of most of our States assert, that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves, in all cases to which they think themselves competent, (as in electing their functionaries executive and legislative, and deciding by a jury of themselves, in all judiciary cases in which any fact is involved,) or they may act by representatives, freely and equally chosen ; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; that they are entitled to freedom of person, freedom of religion, freedom of property, and freedom of the press.” – Letter to Justice John Cartwright, June 5, 1824; “The Writings of Thomas Jefferson,” Definitive Edition, Albert Bergh, editor (Washington, D. C.: Thomas Jefferson Memorial Assoc., 1904), Vol. XVI, p. 45

“We established however some, although not all its important principles. The constitutions of most of our States assert, that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves, in all cases to which they think themselves competent, (as in electing their functionaries executive and legislative, and deciding by a jury of themselves, in all judiciary cases in which any fact is involved,) or they may act by representatives, freely and equally chosen; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; that they are entitled to freedom of person, freedom of religion, freedom of property, and freedom of the press.” – Letter to Major John Cartwright, Monticello, June 5, 1824; Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Albert Ellery Bergh, ed., 19 vol. (1905)

 

[ChrisL]

So daniel? Are you trying to convince us that free men in the 1700s and 1800s were NOT packing heat, that it was illegal for them to do so and unconstitutional? What a load of crapola. If the goal was to allow governmental control over weapons, why were ALL men armed during that time period?

 

[danielpalos]

no dear, it is not about Individual rights, but about the security of a free State and what is necessary to achieve that End.

Now, I as well as others have indeed posted the Federalist papers here on this very thread, I believe. Did you just ignore them so that you can continue on with your nonsensical rants?

dear, the federalist papers support my contention, not yours.

I can quote and link to sections that support my statements. Can you?

The Founding Fathers on the Second Amendment

“A militia when properly formed are in fact the people themselves… and include all men capable of bearing arms. . . To preserve liberty it is essential that the whole body of people always possess arms… The mind that aims at a select militia, must be influenced by a truly anti-republican principle.” – Letters From the Federal Farmer to the Republican, Letter XVIII, January 25, 1788

“(W)hereas, to preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them nor does it follow from this, that all promiscuously must go into actual service on every occasion. The mind that aims at a select militia, must be influenced by a truly anti-republican principle and when we see many men disposed to practice upon it, whenever they can prevail, no wonder true republicans are for carefully guarding against it.” – Federal Farmer, Anti-Federalist Letter, No.18, The Pennsylvania Gazette, February 20, 1788

“No free government was ever founded, or ever preserved its liberty, without uniting the characters of the citizen and soldier in those destined for the defense of the state…such area well-regulated militia, composed of the freeholders, citizen and husbandman, who take up arms to preserve their property, as individuals, and their rights as freemen.” – Richard Henry Lee, State Gazette (Charleston), September 8, 1788

dear, all of those authors support my contention that there are no Individual rights with the terms, militia and the People.

I don't think you know how to read or comprehend what you are reading. Clearly, the intention is that every able-bodied American would be a part of the "militia" and that men have the right to bear arms for self defense. Shall I bold it for you? Maybe that would lessen your confusion and make it more simple for you to understand what it is you are reading?


such area well-regulated militia, composed of the freeholders, citizen and husbandman, who take up arms to preserve their property, as individuals, and their rights as freemen.” – Richard Henry Lee, State Gazette (Charleston), September 8, 1788

dear, militia and the People are the terms used, not Individuals or Persons.

 

[danielpalos]

dear, the federalist papers support my contention, not yours.

That's a lie. Where do they support your contention? Quote the section and link to it please.

dear, you are the one that claims otherwise; cite yours.

I just did, idiot.

no dear, you didn't. you merely claimed you did, like all of the other ones.

Wrong as usual. I quoted it again in post #485. Now, try acting your age and not your shoe size and address the quote.

dear, what is the militia and how can Individuals be unconnected with it? individuals may only be unconnected with militia service, well regulated; not the militia of a State or the Union.

 

[danielpalos]

“False is the idea of utility that sacrifices a thousand real advantages for one imaginary or trifling inconvenience; that would take fire from men because it burns, and water because one may drown in it; that has no remedy for evils, except destruction. Laws that forbid the carrying of arms laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.… Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they act rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.” – Quoting Cesare Beccaria, On Crimes and Punishment

“No freeman shall be debarred the use of arms [within his own lands].” – Proposed Constitution for Virginia – Fair Copy, Section IV:Rights, Private and Public, June 1776; The Works of Thomas Jefferson, Federal Edition, Editor: Paul Leicester Ford, (New York and London, G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1904-5); Vol. 2

“A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercise, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball and others of that nature are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be the constant companion of your walks.” – Letter to Peter Carr, 1785; The Letters of Thomas Jefferson: 1743-1826, Electronic Text Center of University of Virginia

“[W]hat country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms.” – Letter to William Stephens Smith, November 13, 1787; The Works of Thomas Jefferson, Federal Edition (New York and London, G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1904-5) Vol. 5

“The constitutions of most of our States assert, that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves, in all cases to which they think themselves competent, (as in electing their functionaries executive and legislative, and deciding by a jury of themselves, in all judiciary cases in which any fact is involved,) or they may act by representatives, freely and equally chosen ; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; that they are entitled to freedom of person, freedom of religion, freedom of property, and freedom of the press.” – Letter to Justice John Cartwright, June 5, 1824; “The Writings of Thomas Jefferson,” Definitive Edition, Albert Bergh, editor (Washington, D. C.: Thomas Jefferson Memorial Assoc., 1904), Vol. XVI, p. 45

“We established however some, although not all its important principles. The constitutions of most of our States assert, that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves, in all cases to which they think themselves competent, (as in electing their functionaries executive and legislative, and deciding by a jury of themselves, in all judiciary cases in which any fact is involved,) or they may act by representatives, freely and equally chosen; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; that they are entitled to freedom of person, freedom of religion, freedom of property, and freedom of the press.” – Letter to Major John Cartwright, Monticello, June 5, 1824; Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Albert Ellery Bergh, ed., 19 vol. (1905)

dear, hearsay and soothsay is simply that; the terms are clearly enumerated in our Second Amendment.

 

[danielpalos]

So daniel? Are you trying to convince us that free men in the 1700s and 1800s were NOT packing heat, that it was illegal for them to do so and unconstitutional? What a load of crapola. If the goal was to allow governmental control over weapons, why were ALL men armed during that time period?

not at all; that is only the red herring argument of the clueless and the Causeless.

 

[ChrisL]

“False is the idea of utility that sacrifices a thousand real advantages for one imaginary or trifling inconvenience; that would take fire from men because it burns, and water because one may drown in it; that has no remedy for evils, except destruction. Laws that forbid the carrying of arms laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.… Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they act rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.” – Quoting Cesare Beccaria, On Crimes and Punishment

“No freeman shall be debarred the use of arms [within his own lands].” – Proposed Constitution for Virginia – Fair Copy, Section IV:Rights, Private and Public, June 1776; The Works of Thomas Jefferson, Federal Edition, Editor: Paul Leicester Ford, (New York and London, G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1904-5); Vol. 2

“A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercise, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball and others of that nature are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be the constant companion of your walks.” – Letter to Peter Carr, 1785; The Letters of Thomas Jefferson: 1743-1826, Electronic Text Center of University of Virginia

“[W]hat country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms.” – Letter to William Stephens Smith, November 13, 1787; The Works of Thomas Jefferson, Federal Edition (New York and London, G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1904-5) Vol. 5

“The constitutions of most of our States assert, that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves, in all cases to which they think themselves competent, (as in electing their functionaries executive and legislative, and deciding by a jury of themselves, in all judiciary cases in which any fact is involved,) or they may act by representatives, freely and equally chosen ; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; that they are entitled to freedom of person, freedom of religion, freedom of property, and freedom of the press.” – Letter to Justice John Cartwright, June 5, 1824; “The Writings of Thomas Jefferson,” Definitive Edition, Albert Bergh, editor (Washington, D. C.: Thomas Jefferson Memorial Assoc., 1904), Vol. XVI, p. 45

“We established however some, although not all its important principles. The constitutions of most of our States assert, that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves, in all cases to which they think themselves competent, (as in electing their functionaries executive and legislative, and deciding by a jury of themselves, in all judiciary cases in which any fact is involved,) or they may act by representatives, freely and equally chosen; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; that they are entitled to freedom of person, freedom of religion, freedom of property, and freedom of the press.” – Letter to Major John Cartwright, Monticello, June 5, 1824; Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Albert Ellery Bergh, ed., 19 vol. (1905)

dear, hearsay and soothsay is simply that; the terms are clearly enumerated in our Second Amendment.

Exactly. The SC has defined those to include the individual right to self defense.

 

[ChrisL]

So daniel? Are you trying to convince us that free men in the 1700s and 1800s were NOT packing heat, that it was illegal for them to do so and unconstitutional? What a load of crapola. If the goal was to allow governmental control over weapons, why were ALL men armed during that time period?

not at all; that is only the red herring argument of the clueless and the Causeless.

Well, considering that you cannot support your argument with any kind of documentation and considering the fact that free men did in fact carry arms before, during and after the constitution and BOR were written and created, it is quite obvious which one of us is clueless and it certainly is not me.

 

[hunarcy]

The current text: "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."

The right generally interpret the militia to be the unorganized militia, that is the entire body of all militarily capable men. The left generally interprets it to be the organized militias of the old colonies, or at least the current National Guard. Instead let us consider it the collective term for the various state defense forces. They're much like the Guard except in that they do not fall under federal authority in any way. To own a firearm legally, one would to buy and register it. To register as a gun owner, one would need to enlist in their state's defense force. What this would mean in practice is that those people carrying a concealed firearm around you in public would be required to attend regular safety and marksmanship instruction from professionals. The pasty white guy packing the Glock in his jacket pocket would pose less of a danger to you and other bystanders when he decided to play big badass hero.

What do you say? Yea? Nay? Yea with modifications?

You start from a false premise. The militia is not an issue.

It's the right of the PEOPLE not the right of the militia.

 

[hunarcy]

So? What's your point? It's a right and not a law. The founders recognized our rights as natural and NOT to be granted by governmental entities. IOW, our rights existed long before any governments were created by men.

no dear, it is not about Individual rights, but about the security of a free State and what is necessary to achieve that End.

Now, I as well as others have indeed posted the Federalist papers here on this very thread, I believe. Did you just ignore them so that you can continue on with your nonsensical rants?

dear, the federalist papers support my contention, not yours.

I can quote and link to sections that support my statements. Can you?

The Founding Fathers on the Second Amendment

“A militia when properly formed are in fact the people themselves… and include all men capable of bearing arms. . . To preserve liberty it is essential that the whole body of people always possess arms… The mind that aims at a select militia, must be influenced by a truly anti-republican principle.” – Letters From the Federal Farmer to the Republican, Letter XVIII, January 25, 1788

“(W)hereas, to preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them nor does it follow from this, that all promiscuously must go into actual service on every occasion. The mind that aims at a select militia, must be influenced by a truly anti-republican principle and when we see many men disposed to practice upon it, whenever they can prevail, no wonder true republicans are for carefully guarding against it.” – Federal Farmer, Anti-Federalist Letter, No.18, The Pennsylvania Gazette, February 20, 1788

“No free government was ever founded, or ever preserved its liberty, without uniting the characters of the citizen and soldier in those destined for the defense of the state…such area well-regulated militia, composed of the freeholders, citizen and husbandman, who take up arms to preserve their property, as individuals, and their rights as freemen.” – Richard Henry Lee, State Gazette (Charleston), September 8, 1788

dear, all of those authors support my contention that there are no Individual rights with the terms, militia and the People.

"the people" means each citizen. Are you saying that each citizen is not an individual? Or, are you claiming that " the people's" freedom of speech and writing is limited to those who posses a printing press or to works appearing in the news media and individuals do not possess the freedom of speech?

 

[hunarcy]

You know, trying to get a straight answer out of daniel is like . . . . I don't even know what. Something very difficult.

No surprise. The creepy way that he continues to address other males as “dear”, in such a manner as to suggest a sexual interest, would seem to indicate that he is anything but “straight”, and therefore, that a “straight” answer is not ever to be expected from him.

I'm going to get an answer that makes sense if it kills me!

He clearly is willing to lie to continue the debate, so you may not ever get an answer that makes sense.

 

[danielpalos]

“False is the idea of utility that sacrifices a thousand real advantages for one imaginary or trifling inconvenience; that would take fire from men because it burns, and water because one may drown in it; that has no remedy for evils, except destruction. Laws that forbid the carrying of arms laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.… Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they act rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.” – Quoting Cesare Beccaria, On Crimes and Punishment

“No freeman shall be debarred the use of arms [within his own lands].” – Proposed Constitution for Virginia – Fair Copy, Section IV:Rights, Private and Public, June 1776; The Works of Thomas Jefferson, Federal Edition, Editor: Paul Leicester Ford, (New York and London, G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1904-5); Vol. 2

“A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercise, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball and others of that nature are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be the constant companion of your walks.” – Letter to Peter Carr, 1785; The Letters of Thomas Jefferson: 1743-1826, Electronic Text Center of University of Virginia

“[W]hat country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms.” – Letter to William Stephens Smith, November 13, 1787; The Works of Thomas Jefferson, Federal Edition (New York and London, G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1904-5) Vol. 5

“The constitutions of most of our States assert, that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves, in all cases to which they think themselves competent, (as in electing their functionaries executive and legislative, and deciding by a jury of themselves, in all judiciary cases in which any fact is involved,) or they may act by representatives, freely and equally chosen ; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; that they are entitled to freedom of person, freedom of religion, freedom of property, and freedom of the press.” – Letter to Justice John Cartwright, June 5, 1824; “The Writings of Thomas Jefferson,” Definitive Edition, Albert Bergh, editor (Washington, D. C.: Thomas Jefferson Memorial Assoc., 1904), Vol. XVI, p. 45

“We established however some, although not all its important principles. The constitutions of most of our States assert, that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves, in all cases to which they think themselves competent, (as in electing their functionaries executive and legislative, and deciding by a jury of themselves, in all judiciary cases in which any fact is involved,) or they may act by representatives, freely and equally chosen; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; that they are entitled to freedom of person, freedom of religion, freedom of property, and freedom of the press.” – Letter to Major John Cartwright, Monticello, June 5, 1824; Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Albert Ellery Bergh, ed., 19 vol. (1905)

dear, hearsay and soothsay is simply that; the terms are clearly enumerated in our Second Amendment.

Exactly. The SC has defined those to include the individual right to self defense.

from where? posse comitatus is common law; not, the militia of a State or the Union.

 

[danielpalos]

So daniel? Are you trying to convince us that free men in the 1700s and 1800s were NOT packing heat, that it was illegal for them to do so and unconstitutional? What a load of crapola. If the goal was to allow governmental control over weapons, why were ALL men armed during that time period?

not at all; that is only the red herring argument of the clueless and the Causeless.

Well, considering that you cannot support your argument with any kind of documentation and considering the fact that free men did in fact carry arms before, during and after the constitution and BOR were written and created, it is quite obvious which one of us is clueless and it certainly is not me.

irrelevant; the Intent and Purpose supports no such contention. the terms are collective not Individual should we need to quibble that point in legal venues.

 

[danielpalos]

The current text: "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."

The right generally interpret the militia to be the unorganized militia, that is the entire body of all militarily capable men. The left generally interprets it to be the organized militias of the old colonies, or at least the current National Guard. Instead let us consider it the collective term for the various state defense forces. They're much like the Guard except in that they do not fall under federal authority in any way. To own a firearm legally, one would to buy and register it. To register as a gun owner, one would need to enlist in their state's defense force. What this would mean in practice is that those people carrying a concealed firearm around you in public would be required to attend regular safety and marksmanship instruction from professionals. The pasty white guy packing the Glock in his jacket pocket would pose less of a danger to you and other bystanders when he decided to play big badass hero.

What do you say? Yea? Nay? Yea with modifications?

You start from a false premise. The militia is not an issue.

It's the right of the PEOPLE not the right of the militia.

dear, not just Any militia (of the People) is enumerated, but well regulated militias of the People are specifically enumerated.