The history of 2nd ammendment

This is a discussion on The history of 2nd ammendment within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; It was not quite what I expected. A few quotes: Articles: The Real Second Amendment We must first understand that we did not invent the ...

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 35
Like Tree37Likes

Thread: The history of 2nd ammendment

  1. #1
    Member Array kdydak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    158

    The history of 2nd ammendment

    It was not quite what I expected. A few quotes:

    Articles: The Real Second Amendment

    We must first understand that we did not invent the 2nd Amendment; we inherited it. The justification of the 2nd Amendment is rooted in late 12th and early 13th century England with the innovation of the Welsh; later called English, longbow

    They entered London on June 15, 1215 with their militias and forced King John to submit to the rule of law prescribed by the Magna Carta. The Magna Carta subordinated the king to the rule of law based on Henry I's Charter and the notion of common law throughout the realm, and it set England on the path to developing representative parliamentary democracy.

    The 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was derived from our understanding of the British experience that militias were necessary to curb the tyrannical powers of the king

    Furthermore, like the militias of the English barons, these state militias were formed ad hoc from the populace as needed on short notice and therefore depended on the populace being already proficient in the art of arms. The only way the Founders of America could guarantee this capability was to encourage civil proficiency in arms and make private ownership and use of arms a tenet of the constitution establishing the government

    Limiting the power of the federal government to subjugate the populace is the primary purpose of the 2nd Amendment

    What we do with guns is the subject of existing criminal law, but having them is not

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    VIP Member
    Array OldVet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    S. Florida, north of the Miami mess, south of the Mouse trap
    Posts
    14,580
    And look where all that history has gotten the Brits today--unarmed.
    Retired USAF E-8. Avatar is OldVet from days long gone. Oh, to be young again.
    Paranoia strikes deep, into your heart it will creep. It starts when you're always afraid... "For What It's Worth" Buffalo Springfield

  4. #3
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,158
    That is a fantasy interpretation that is inconsistent with our own early and actual history.
    As with many things, there are pieces of truth in the article, but allowing for the populace to
    revolt was not one of the intentions of the writers, or the BOR. In fact, they would have perceived no
    need for such given the representative political system they created.

    Several incidents of rebellion and challenge to state or federal authority (both from the civilian population and by
    military units) occurred between 1775 and
    the end of Thomas Jefferson's administration, about 35 years later. They didn't end well for those
    who thought they could challenge the lawful authorities. Most were lucky that President Washington tended to be a
    generous and forgiving man who saved them from the noose.

    What really gets to me is the persistent assertions by a few participants that somehow our government
    is tyrannical. You don't like it, there is nothing whatsoever to stop you from doing your part to bring about
    change, including running for elected office at the local level. If you are a success, you can go higher.

    Instead, too many come on to this board and speak like they have some sacred right to turn us into
    a chaotic bloody country as so frequently seen in other parts of the world. That is not a desirable end.
    No thank you. And btw, that "rebel" argument is one that turns many people off and is ultimately
    counter productive to gaining gun laws more favorable to us.
    Doghandler and oakchas like this.
    If the Union is once severed, the line of separation will grow wider and wider, and the controversies which are now debated and settled in the halls of legislation will then be tried in fields of battle and determined by the sword.
    Andrew Jackson

  5. #4
    VIP Member
    Array OldVet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    S. Florida, north of the Miami mess, south of the Mouse trap
    Posts
    14,580
    The "Whiskey Rebellion" for one.

    I gave up the fight after signing on for the Army of the "Conch Republic."
    Retired USAF E-8. Avatar is OldVet from days long gone. Oh, to be young again.
    Paranoia strikes deep, into your heart it will creep. It starts when you're always afraid... "For What It's Worth" Buffalo Springfield

  6. #5
    Member Array Tayopo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Alamos, Son, Mexico
    Posts
    190
    -------------------5th-----------------------\

    Don Jose de La Mancha

    "I exist to live, not live to exist"

  7. #6
    VIP Member
    Array oneshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    +42.893612,-082.710236 , Mi.
    Posts
    7,547
    Hopyard, IDK if I fully agree with the way you are representing your ideas


    This is how/why I believe it(the 2nd amendment) is in place, and how it is interpreted.


    Noah Webster believed that having an armed public would prevent the government from becoming corrupted because the people would have more power than the government itself. He wrote:

    "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States."


    AND
    After all, Thomas Jefferson had written in the Declaration of Independence that if a government failed to protect its citizens and instead became the enemy, the citizens had the right to overthrow it! So one reason the citizens wanted to be armed was not just for defense against external enemies. They wanted protection from their own government!



    Read more: 2nd Amendment
    Last edited by oneshot; December 9th, 2012 at 06:12 AM.
    If you want to make God laugh, tell him your plans.

    Washington didn't use his freedom of speech to defeat the British, He shot them!

    Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy." -- Ernest Benn

  8. #7
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    24,179
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    That is a fantasy interpretation that is inconsistent with our own early and actual history.

    Instead, too many come on to this board and speak like they have some sacred right to turn us into
    a chaotic bloody country as so frequently seen in other parts of the world.
    Disagree.

    IMO, it's not about wishing to create bloody chaos. Rather, it's about retaining every right and ability to resist it. In large part, it's why those who escaped England came to the colonies in the first place, why they refused the oppressive rule, and why an armed populace was enshrined in the 2A as an unassailable right of the people.
    oneshot, DPro.40 and Secret Spuk like this.
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  9. #8
    VIP Member Array xXxplosive's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,629
    It's why on April 19th we took a stand as an independent people.......they found out what Militia's were about on their retreat back to Boston......and it wasn't pretty.
    The Old Anglo likes this.

  10. #9
    VIP Member
    Array atctimmy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    NSA Headquarters
    Posts
    6,242
    I hate when folks try to tie our Constitution or our Bill Of Rights with English common law. We threw off our English oppressors and we created a completely new form of government. Our Bill Of Rights is completely unlike anything else in the world.

    To claim that our Republic is based on English common law is a willful distortion of the truth. We WERE English as a colony so SOME of our ideas were brought forth from existing English paradigms, but the Constitution was a completely new idea. The freedoms it promises are as different as night and day from English law. It's time people realize that OUR law starts with OUR Constitution and the revolutionary ideas it contained.
    Last edited by atctimmy; December 8th, 2012 at 06:43 PM. Reason: clarity

  11. #10
    VIP Member Array Brad426's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    3,552
    Quote Originally Posted by atctimmy View Post
    I hate when folks try to tie our Constitution or our bill of rights with English common law. We threw off our English oppressors and we created a completely new form of government. Our bill Of Rights is completely unlike anything else in the world.

    To claim that our laws are based on English common law is a willful distortion of the truth. We WERE English as a colony so SOME of our ideas were brought forth from existing English paradigms, but the Constitution was a completely new idea. The freedoms it promises are as different as night and day from English law. It's time people realize that OUR law starts with OUR Constitution and the revolutionary ideas it contained.
    Me too. I also hate Brussels sprouts.
    AngryBadger417 and Ksgunner like this.
    I have a very strict gun control policy: if there's a gun around, I want to be in control of it.
    Clint Eastwood

  12. #11
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,158
    Quote Originally Posted by atctimmy View Post
    I hate when folks try to tie our Constitution or our bill of rights with English common law. We threw off our English oppressors and we created a completely new form of government. Our bill Of Rights is completely unlike anything else in the world.

    To claim that our laws are based on English common law is a willful distortion of the truth. We WERE English as a colony so SOME of our ideas were brought forth from existing English paradigms, but the Constitution was a completely new idea. The freedoms it promises are as different as night and day from English law. It's time people realize that OUR law starts with OUR Constitution and the revolutionary ideas it contained.
    Yes and no. Even today, most of our court rulings can be traced to English Common Law, unless you live in
    Louisiana. Our founders may have written new state constitutions, but the everyday laws and the every day
    court sessions continued in the English tradition, with ruling based largely on English common law.

    The revolution didn't change how the courts dealt with divorce or land disputes. It didn't change how they dealt with
    taxation or wills, or criminal trial procedures. All of that stuff taken from the English remained very much a part of our life, and remains present today. (That is, on precedent from the UK.)

    Culture can't be changed instantly, even with a new form of government, and
    our population in the 1780-1800 period was culturally British; even as the English were
    despised.
    If the Union is once severed, the line of separation will grow wider and wider, and the controversies which are now debated and settled in the halls of legislation will then be tried in fields of battle and determined by the sword.
    Andrew Jackson

  13. #12
    VIP Member
    Array ksholder's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    3,670
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    That is a fantasy interpretation that is inconsistent with our own early and actual history.
    As with many things, there are pieces of truth in the article, but allowing for the populace to
    revolt was not one of the intentions of the writers, or the BOR. In fact, they would have perceived no
    need for such given the representative political system they created.

    Several incidents of rebellion and challenge to state or federal authority (both from the civilian population and by
    military units) occurred between 1775 and
    the end of Thomas Jefferson's administration, about 35 years later. They didn't end well for those
    who thought they could challenge the lawful authorities. Most were lucky that President Washington tended to be a
    generous and forgiving man who saved them from the noose.

    What really gets to me is the persistent assertions by a few participants that somehow our government
    is tyrannical. You don't like it, there is nothing whatsoever to stop you from doing your part to bring about
    change, including running for elected office at the local level. If you are a success, you can go higher.

    Instead, too many come on to this board and speak like they have some sacred right to turn us into
    a chaotic bloody country as so frequently seen in other parts of the world. That is not a desirable end.
    No thank you. And btw, that "rebel" argument is one that turns many people off and is ultimately
    counter productive to gaining gun laws more favorable to us.
    Hop Milking Cow.jpg

    Hop - haven't you milked this cow for all it's worth already?
    atctimmy likes this.
    It's the Land of Opportunity, not the Land of Entitlements - Vote America!!!

    "When governments fear the people there is liberty. When the people fear the government there is tyranny." Thomas Jefferson

    You are only paranoid until you are right - then you are a visionary.

  14. #13
    VIP Member
    Array atctimmy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    NSA Headquarters
    Posts
    6,242
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    Yes and no. Even today, most of our court rulings can be traced to English Common Law, unless you live in
    Louisiana. Our founders may have written new state constitutions, but the everyday laws and the every day
    court sessions continued in the English tradition, with ruling based largely on English common law.

    The revolution didn't change how the courts dealt with divorce or land disputes. It didn't change how they dealt with
    taxation or wills, or criminal trial procedures. All of that stuff taken from the English remained very much a part of our life, and remains present today. (That is, on precedent from the UK.)

    Culture can't be changed instantly, even with a new form of government, and
    our population in the 1780-1800 period was culturally British; even as the English were
    despised.
    Once again you focus on one word in in the entirety of my post in order to post a rebuttal.

    I hate when folks try to tie our Constitution or our Bill Of Rights with English common law. We threw off our English oppressors and we created a completely new form of government. Our Bill Of Rights is completely unlike anything else in the world.
    Here is the focus of my post^^^^ It's about the Constitution and our Bill Of Rights. It's not about divorce or land disputes.

  15. #14
    VIP Member Array 1MoreGoodGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Fort Worth, Texas
    Posts
    5,445
    Regards,
    1MoreGoodGuy
    NRA Life Member
    GOA Life Member


    Behave Like Someone Who is Determined to be FREE!

  16. #15
    VIP Member
    Array atctimmy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    NSA Headquarters
    Posts
    6,242
    Quote Originally Posted by 1MoreGoodGuy View Post
    With butter and salt?

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

2nd ammendment
,
a history of 2nd ammendment regulations
,

discourse on the 2nd ammendment of the u.s. constitution, original framers

,
discussion about 2nd amendment 1780
,
second amendment
,
trace ammendment 10 to magna carta
,
what british actions led to the 2nd ammendment
Click on a term to search for related topics.