2A Clarification and Question.
This is a discussion on 2A Clarification and Question. within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; I just got done watching the Penn and Teller ******** show on gun controll for the third time. I really like thouse guys and what ...
April 10th, 2006 09:32 PM
2A Clarification and Question.
I just got done watching the Penn and Teller ******** show on gun controll for the third time. I really like thouse guys and what they have to say. Anyway I had a question arise in my brain from a statment they made after reading the second amendment.
They said that the peoples right to a formed and armed militia shall not be infrindged. Well thats the jist of what they said , i dont know it word for word basicly it seemed to mean that the people can bare arms and form a militia in order to protect ourselfs from our government. This is a great amendment! I really like it.
Now this is where i need clarification. How does that statement apply to todays society? What if a dirty cop beings to infrindge upon my rights and does something that could be taken as "butal" or against my well being? Do I have the right to shoot him\her? Another example.. My local government begins to treat people really wrong. Breaking laws in order to imprison innocent people. They begin to break our constitutional rights. Do we as people have the right to form an army of our own to overthrow them with force?
Last question. If a person does fire on someone that is in a political position to harm them and "get away with it" how would someone get out of trouble and or prove they were only folowing the 2A?
Im a youngster and a newbie in the CCW world so please be gentle. I just want to be as correctly informed as possible. I also am going to be studying everything I can get my hands on about my rights as an american citizen. Thanks guys in advance.
::Edit:: I just re read the second amendment and ingraved it into my memory. sorry for the sin of not knowing it by heart. got it in there now!!!!
I carry because I care.
"An armed man is a citizen. An unarmed man is a subject."
"Cling to the Father and His Holy name, and don't go riding on the Long Black Train" - Josh Turner
April 10th, 2006 10:49 PM
You've asked the sort of questions that might be better to discuss with an attorney and maybe not hash out on an internet forum... although they are honest questions
I believe the "Four Boxes" of freedom are the correct order of escalation: Soap Box/Ballot Box/Jury Box/Cartridge Box
"I surrounded 'em"- Alvin York
"They're ain't many troubles that a man can't fix with seven hundred dollars and a thirty ought six"- Jeff Cooper
April 10th, 2006 11:04 PM
Imho any issues with local gvt. is best addressed in court , go higher there if necessairy and history has shown you will get resolution. The sailent point ( to me at least ) is that the us supreme court has not addressed on the 2nd as they have on other ammendments is to clearify that the " right of the people " is an indivigual right , untill this is actualy addressed by them all bets are off on any 2nd ammendment defense of anything .
April 10th, 2006 11:31 PM
VIP Member (Retired Staff)
My take is - we do not have any ''right'' to shoot anyone. We do however have the right to bear arms and use such in legitimate defence of self and family.
If the aggressor is a politician, errant cop, any so called ''non civilian'' then ideally we should not be treated any different providing our actions can be proven to be justified. That to me is the bottom line - meaning we used a gun because we were in fear of our life.
As to outcome - that may be different, depending on whether justice scales get tipped off center! (cynic talking).
Chris - P95
NRA Certified Instructor & NRA Life Member.
"To own a gun and assume that you are armed
is like owning a piano and assuming that you are a musician!."
- a portal for 2A links, articles and some videos.
April 11th, 2006 11:40 AM
Taking the "in order to maintain a well regulated militia" part out of context is a mainstay of the "anti" crowd.
In order to do just that, "the people's right" must not be infringed, is a clear statement that such a right does indeed exist.
Further down in the Bill, it is pointed out that the bill itself does not grant these rights, rather they already exist. Nor does the Bill of Rights claim to be a complete list.
Political Correctness has now "evolved" into Political Cowardice.
April 11th, 2006 02:17 PM
Good for you! You have more reading to do. Now that you've read the 2A, you need to read the Federalist Papers, Alexander Hamilton, Benjamin Franklin, and Thomas Jefferson, along with the debates on the Constitution in the 1780's. Their perspectives on the right to keep and bear arms, and their perspectives on freedom will help you answer your own questions. The 2A gives you the right to keep and bear arms; it doesn't give you the right to shoot anyone. The militia referred to in the 2A was the militia of able-bodied male citizens in place at the time for the common defense. Now, the militia is defined in the U.S. Code. Many states have militias, too, separate from the National Guard, but few if any are armed. And there are private militias. Rising up against your own government is truly an act of last resort - just as drawing your weapon against another person would be.
Originally Posted by Gelicious
Edited to add - you also need to read the Preamble to the Bill of Rights. Most discussions forget the Preamble, but it is extremely important to understanding the rest of the document.
By KoB in forum Defensive Ammunition & Ballistics
Last Post: October 17th, 2009, 06:46 PM
By moparoutlaw in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
Last Post: October 6th, 2009, 11:52 PM
By BrianGarms in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
Last Post: August 13th, 2009, 12:14 PM
By Drake in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
Last Post: February 15th, 2008, 09:10 AM
By alyehoud in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
Last Post: October 4th, 2007, 10:13 AM