Page 1 of 1
US Senate reference to the 2nd on a US Govt page
Posted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 9:19 am
by texanjoker
I saw the first link so dug so more. This is pretty concerning on an official US Senate page! 1st link the story, 2nd the US Senate page.
Amendment II (1791)
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.
Whether this provision protects the individual's right to own firearms or whether it deals only with the collective right of the people to arm and maintain a militia has long been debated.
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government ... ment-Wrong
http://www.senate.gov/civics/constituti ... t_2_(1791)
Re: US Senate reference to the 2nd on a US Govt page
Posted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 10:07 am
by mewalke
Well, the statement is not wrong. There has been a long debate on whether it applies to the individual or not. But between Heller and McDonald, the SCOTUS has pretty definitively answered that question.
Re: US Senate reference to the 2nd on a US Govt page
Posted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 1:05 pm
by rbwhatever1
Debated yes, and also ended a long time ago unless we allow the State to re-write history and change the English language. We all know what it means, it's written very clearly. If one believes that the right to bear arms is strictly for the "militia", then every 18 year old American should be issued fully automatic rifles, hand grenades, rocket launchers and enough ammunition and rockets to last a few decades. Which way do the morons wish to go here?
This "militia recognition statement" derived from George Mason's Virginia writings, is the only sentence written by Madison in the Bill of Rights that is not actionable, strongly worded, prohibiting, limiting or enforceable. In fact, Madison was against this Bill of Rights because he believed it was a poor protection of Liberty. The People of the States demanded it. Without George Mason's support, the Bill of Rights might not exist.
The Debate was between Virginia's well regulated militia, Pennsylvannia's Individual right to bear arms, and the Massaschusetts model circa 1791 which was specifically rejected by the First Congress.
Now we have two models.
1) Virginia's well Regulated Militia / George Mason - Harringtonian model.
2) Pennsylvannia's Radical Individual Right to Arms / Jeffersonian suffrage model.
I'm sure most of us can figure out which model Madison pointed towards just by reading the enforceable portion of the 2nd Amendment....