It says "well trained militia"

[flotsam]

and I was trained by the US Army. But I am willing to give up as many of mine as it takes. How about this-you become militia qualified only by serving and NOT receiving a dishonorable discharge? Suppose you exhibited proficiency by military training? Suppose even then it was semis banned? Because I could live with that.

[kelly1mm]

1. What says "well trained militia"? Not the 2nd Amendment. Nt

[Cattledog]

2. Not really. It 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.

[brush]

3. Aren't "well trained" and "well regulated" synonymous in that sense?

Give the guy a little leeway. His point is well taken.

[Lee-Lee]

5. In the verbiage of the time it was written, not necessarily

“Well Regulated” was a common phrase of the era and meant well-functioning or well-equipped.

[brush]

6. Ahhh...wouldn't militia have to be well trained to be well functioning?

[Lee-Lee]

8. Possibly. Maybe not, several sprung up with no prior training and did well

My point is that it’s a wider meaning than just trained and very different than how the term regulated is commonly used today.

[brush]

12. The OP poster makes a good point though. Let's not fail to acknowledge that while quiblling over...

slightly different verbiage.

[Drahthaardogs]

4. It says well regulated, not trained

And considering the military won't accept you for simple things like asthma...NO!

I won't get denied a right because I have asthma.

[Lee-Lee]

7. No. We dont make rights contingent upon service in this country

Nor should we.

If you set the precedent for one right to be restricted only to those to do some sort of service that opens the doors to regulating others like that.


What if they did the same for voting? Or speech?

Bad precedent to go down and it sounds very Starship Trooperish.

[aikoaiko]

9. Well, it's the militia that is well-regulated, not the people with the RKBA arms.

[coolsandy]

10. 2nd Amendment has always been mis-interpreted on purpose. Grammar!

One day it will be overturned but what will happen to all the weapons out there?

[kydo]

11. It's "well regulated" " not "trained." However I take "well regulated" to mean

Regulated as in regulations and regulations are laws. In today's speak we call that "gun control". So I see nothing wrong with regulating what types of guns, ammo, and accessories can be sold. Nor do I see anything unconstitutional about regulations on who can own a gun, yeah background checks.

What is unregulated are those gun shows. I consider those unconstitutional.

[Lee-Lee]

13. Your wrong on several counts

“Well Regulated” in the time that was written meant well functioning. It didn’t mean what we commonly mean by “Regulated” in today’s vernacular.

And you should brush up on the law on things like gun shows before making statements. In what way do you think they are “unregulated”? Specifically what about them is different than anything else or any other place a gun is sold? I would particularly like specific examples of what about a gun show is unconstitutional, if you can cite the actual law that leads you to believe that.

[Turbineguy]

14. The meaning of "well regulated" has always been

controversial and subject to changing interpretations. It seems that the current meaning of the term is, "wife beater".

[usedtobedemgurl]

15. Every time my friends talk about their gun rights, I say.....

Yes, and as a part of a well regulated militia. I love to support people who follow the law and I think you will look very cute in fatigues. For some reason they drop the subject at that point. I don't get it.

[hack89]

16. I hear that occasionally

I usually change the subject because it is clear any conversation would be non-productive.

[hack89]

17. When was that golden age in American history

When private ownership of guns outside of militia service was rare and government rigorously enforced the militia clause of the 2A?

Clearly that had to be the case sometimes in our history - right?