historic definition of 2nd Amendment

[Guest PapaB]

Interesting article on the definition of the 2nd Amendment based on "An American Dictionary of the English Language," published in 1828 and noted as being adopted by congress as the "American Standard".

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080622/OPINION03/806220306/1031

[Guest nraforlife]

Excellent

[G27]

Nice find, thanks.

[Guest Abominable_Hillbilly]

His treatment of "well-regulated" isn't comforting. He uses the single term "regulated" instead. Which, to the anti's, means burdened with heavy regulation. NICS registration schemes, etc.

"Well-regulated" was often used during the time of the writing of the Second Amendment to mean well trained and well equipped. Looked after. Afforded for.

[The Rabbi]

His treatment of "well-regulated" isn't comforting. He uses the single term "regulated" instead. Which, to the anti's, means burdened with heavy regulation. NICS registration schemes, etc.

"Well-regulated" was often used during the time of the writing of the Second Amendment to mean well trained and well equipped. Looked after. Afforded for.

What is a "NICS registration scheme"?

In a sense the phrase well regulated militia is irrelevant to the main clause. But it does shed some interesting light on the idea of personal weapons as opposed to, e.g. crew served weapons.

[Guest Abominable_Hillbilly]

What is a "NICS registration scheme"?

In a sense the phrase well regulated militia is irrelevant to the main clause. But it does shed some interesting light on the idea of personal weapons as opposed to, e.g. crew served weapons.

If the anti's wish to make "well-regulated" mean "heavily regulated," it becomes relevant.

When my background check is conducted, my name and other identifying information are given along with a firearm's serial number. They can say what they want, but I don't trust them.

[Guest bkelm18]

If the anti's wish to make "well-regulated" mean "heavily regulated," it becomes relevant.

When my background check is conducted, my name and other identifying information are given along with a firearm's serial number. They can say what they want, but I don't trust them.

Then don't buy from a dealer.

[The Rabbi]

Then don't buy from a dealer.

+1.

[Guest Abominable_Hillbilly]

I do engage in private sales, but I'm not sure how that would speak to the appropriateness or actual reality of a "registration scheme," which, of course was the topic of discussion.

[The Rabbi]

I do engage in private sales, but I'm not sure how that would speak to the appropriateness or actual reality of a "registration scheme," which, of course was the topic of discussion.

Actually the topic of discussion was the original view of the Founders based on a study of the language as it existed in their day.

The paranoid registration scheme was your invention.

[Guest Abominable_Hillbilly]

Actually the topic of discussion was the original view of the Founders based on a study of the language as it existed in their day.

The paranoid registration scheme was your invention.

Uh, actually the topic of discussion was the original view of the Founders based on a study of the language as it existed in their day, and I added to that topic by mentioning this guy's use of "regulated". That brought us to the potential for the anti's to simply attempt to regulate arms out of existence, and I mentioned the potential to use the NICS background checks as an example of how easily registration ("regulation") could be achieved.

Where's the disconnect from the original discussion, bud?

And where's the paranoia?

[Guest canynracer]

This part is kinda creepy...

"

"Militia" was defined as "able bodied men organized into companies, regiments and brigades, with officers ... and required by law to attend military exercises on certain days only, but at other times left to pursue their usual occupations"

Sooo...mandatory training for all?

[Guest Abominable_Hillbilly]

This part is kinda creepy...

"

"Militia" was defined as "able bodied men organized into companies, regiments and brigades, with officers ... and required by law to attend military exercises on certain days only, but at other times left to pursue their usual occupations"

Sooo...mandatory training for all?

Hmh. I've thought about this before. Have you ever taken someone shooting who was previously anti-gun? I have. Several times. In each instance, they walked away not nearly so anti-gun as they had a chance to see what it was all about. Perhaps mandatory firearms training (even if only in our high schools) wouldn't be the such a bad.

But, I understand what you're getting at. Mandatory military service. I don't know. You could make pretty good arguments on both sides.

[Guest canynracer]

Hmh. I've thought about this before. Have you ever taken someone shooting who was previously anti-gun? I have. Several times. In each instance, they walked away not nearly so anti-gun as they had a chance to see what it was all about. Perhaps mandatory firearms training (even if only in our high schools) wouldn't be the such a bad.

But, I understand what you're getting at. Mandatory military service. I don't know. You could make pretty good arguments on both sides.

Not Military "service".... required by law to attend military exercises on certain days only,

still....yeah....kinda makes me wonder...I'd do it...but how many HCP holders wouldnt?