Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Gun Control & RKBA
In reply to the discussion: Americans Don't Have the Right to Bear Just Any Arms [View all]beevul
(12,194 posts)46. More specifically...
The existence of the preamble and its content, make perfectly crystal clear, that claims claiming that amendment 2 'authorizes' anything, are completely wrong.
Amendment 2 contains only restrictions on governmental exercise of power.
When they wrote amendment 2, it was 'farmers and townspeople' and indeed all citizens of the nation, who they were protecting from 'misconstruction or abuse' of government power.
Not exclusively 'the militia'.
The Congress shall have Power To ...provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions....
Article I, Section 8, Clause 15
Article I, Section 8, Clause 15
The above authorizes government to call forth the militia...
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.
Amendment 2, on the other hand, forbids it from disarming 'the people', not just 'the militia'.
Strictly speaking, "When they wrote the Second Amendment, they figured they needed the farmers and townspeople to be able to form a militia in a few hours to shoot at the King's troops" is incorrect.
If you changed it to read " "When they wrote Article I, Section 8, Clause 15..." it would be spot on.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
64 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Any thoughts on the article or do you just uncritically accept whatever any GC advocate says?
Nuclear Unicorn
Jul 2015
#1
It appears to be a pre-expanded expanding bullet, clearly more dangerous than
petronius
Jul 2015
#16
Uses a spare magazine as a foregrip, note that the magazine is upside down. n/t
Shamash
Jul 2015
#18
I thought it was a Beretta too. What the fuck is that doohicky on the front, a can opener?
AtheistCrusader
Jul 2015
#49
And uninformed Controllers are the *last* people we'll trust to decide which guns are OK. NT
pablo_marmol
Jul 2015
#21
Those are the bullets capable of knocking airliners out of the sky, dontcha know!
pablo_marmol
Jul 2015
#35
The gun control lobby pushed the "assault weapon" issue as a way to build momentum
benEzra
Jul 2015
#59