The first thing we need to know is what the Second Amendment actually says.
Second Amendment;
"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."
1. Militia
2. Free State
3. Arms
4. Infringement
To learn what the Founders considered the actual meanings of their precise words in the Constitution and it's Amendments I will use Samuel Johnsons "Dictionary of the English Language (1785)" and the JSTOR.org, for contemporary definitions of the terms which are critical to understanding exactly what the Founders meant.
1. Militia;
. The Militia Era (1775–1830) https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7249/j.ctt19rmdcb.11?seq=1
At first glance, the American military history of the late 18th and early 19th centuries
provides the strongest evidence for the first hypothesis: that the National Guard—or in its earlier
incarnation, the militia—served as the principal instrument of American national security.
Logically it would also provide for individual communities security as well. Today what the Founders called the Militia would be on one hand the National Guard to protect the States, and inmdividual Police forces to protect individual communities within those States like we have in today's world.
2. Free State;
"Mode of government. No state can be named wherein any part of the body of those imperial laws hath the just force of a law, otherwise than as custom hath particularly induced it.
a. The community; the publick; the commonwealth.
b. A republick; a government not monarchical."
3. Arms; (https://publicdomainreview.org/collection/samuel-johnson-s-dictionary-of-the-english-language-1785/)
Arms. n.s. without the singular number. [arma, Lat.]
1. Weapons of offence, or armour of defence."
1. Weapons of offence, or armour of defence."
This means any and all conventional weapons the Military or Militia may have to wage war.
4. Infringed; (https://publicdomainreview.org/collection/samuel-johnson-s-dictionary-of-the-english-language-1785/)
Infri'ngement. n.s. [from infringe.] Breach; violation.
Going with these definitions, a reasonable and prudent adult can make some conclusions.
The very first of which is;
The Founders were not just talking about guns when they specified ARMS. Using the specific word ARMS instead of guns, rifles, muskets etc. they meant all conventional weapons the Military or the Militia used when defending or waging war. That is because then Second Amendment is not about hunting rights, not even about domestic self defense rights, it's about the people being able to defend the Republic against it's own government should it become oppressive. Or, being able to defend their own communities until the Police, the Regular Military, or the National Guard can step in act in defense of the community under attack or disruption.
The Second Amendment was foreshadowed by Article-V in the main body of the Constitution. Article-V gives the Congress and/or the People, the provision of changing the Three Branches of Government's definition of how any section of the Constitution is interpreted in day to day enforcement of the provisions of the Constitution. It however does not change the Constitution since an Amendment can be repealed like the 18th was. It only defines how the Courts including the Supreme Court is ordered by the People to enforce the various articles of the Constitution in day to day life.
By point of information, the Congress and Courts have been terrified the people would actually use that protected right and diminish their 'assumed' not designated powers .
It also explains why the Amendment lists both the Militia and the People as protecting the rights to own and bear weapons without infringement, as being necessary to maintain the security of a Free State.
It's inclusive of BOTH the standing Militia/Police and the People themselves. Not exclusive like the hard left Eliteist Pseudo-Dictators (Democrats) so often try to force on us with their Laws, Rules, and Regulations, all of which are an infringement of those protected rights as is intended by the Amendment.
No other definition makes any logical sense.
The Tradesman
Replies
Hey Tradesman, I'm done taking about the 2nd amendment. I'm locked and loaded.
If any of the rioters come to my door they are going to witness an reinactment of the 2nd A.
Me and my baby!
The second amendment very clear.....we just need a government that respects and follows our laws!
I agree it's clear, but I also believe we need an Amendment that punishes any government agency including the three branches, that ignores it. It would also hjave to have a portipon that required a 3/4 vote by the people to enmforce any existing laws, rules, or regulations and requore 3/4 vote approval for any new ones where the people can overrule any branch of government on this.
We have the laws......they are ignoring them, the laws are for all, including those who are there to apply them!
Absoliutely!