“All I’m asking for is the right to the same weapons that I paid for the Taliban to own.”
– White Nationalist Michael Malice
Seriously? This guy really wants his hands on Stinger missles given the Afghan rebels (the Taliban would ultimately take possession of the Stingers and use them against us) by Reagan? Isn’t it enough that the AR-15 assault weapons used in all these mass shootings in the US were meant only as weapons of war and not for hunting or stalking school children? But now this clown apparently wants stingers, too?
Full disclosure: This was a “Quote of the Day” from today’s Hayride (wonder where they got the idea?)
Louisiana Voice 
I wonder why no one ever asks these “Second Amendment Gun Nuts” about that part about “well regulated militia? While some do belong to “unregulated groups”….most of them are just individuals spouting off about their “Second Amendment Rights”. It is very disturbing to hear our elected officials repeat this as a reason to NOT ban the sale of weapons of war and the ammo, when they should define exactly what “well regulated militia” means and even if they are in our National Guard, shouldn’t these weapons be issued for use while on duty and not to take home and display/use privately? Does our National Guard even issue these weapons? So much to unpack about this “Gun Lust!” Meanwhile….innocent school kids get mowed down as if on the battle field…Shame on America!
Thank you for bringing this up, Edith. We discussed this at length in one of my political science classes recently. It is clear to me and was to most of my fellow class members that the key to the whole intent of the 2nd amendment is set its first clauses you cite. Hopefully, we no longer need a militia since we have a strong military and the national guard.
Louisiana created a state militia in 1942 to protect the state in case of national guard activation for the war effort. The Louisiana State Guard still exists today for that ostensible purpose and it may be activated by the governor in the event of an emergency requiring its service. Earlier, during the war of 1812, we, and other states, had several militias to protect us from invasion since the United States didn’t have a huge professional military force like today.
So, I would say if you are a member of the Louisiana State Guard or another state sanctioned militia and it truly is WELL REGULATED, you have full gun rights. Otherwise, you should certainly be subject to restrictions.
Here is the full text of the 2nd Amendment to the U. S. Constitution:
“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.”
Notwithstanding the odd punctuation, the intent seems clear to me.
Stephen, as a former legislative drafter, I don’t understand how one can read that sentence and come away with a different intent. It’s as if they are treating the comma after “State” as though it is a period.
The “security of a free State” establishes the necessity of a “well regulated Militia” which at the time was comprised of citizen-soldiers who were required to bring their own arms and therefore the right “the right to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” But as you noted the country no longer depends on citizen-soldiers showing up with their own guns. The country has a standing, professional military. Therefore the conditions under which that right is granted no longer exists. If the conditions no longer exists the right no longer exists – or is certainly subject to “well regulated.” Any sixth grader should be able to diagram that sentence to determine its clear meaning. But then students are expected to practice intellectual honesty. Politicians and sold out voters not so much.
S Paul, like your comments. But, our problem is past Supreme Court justices who have interpreted as such. Until there is a court comprised of reasonable people, who can clearly decipher the intent of the 2nd Amendment, we will have to live with precedence. I remember reading an article on Antonin Scalia. The former justice said he does not have to read minutes of hearings, or footnotes, to discover the intent of legislative or constitutional laws, the intent is in the words. Well, I guess he didn’t read the 2nd Amendment with those thoughts in mind.
FYI There was no taliban during the eighties We were supporting the northern alliance and they are still opposed to the taliban
Sent from my iPhone
>
You are absolutely correct. And I have made the correction.
Y’all need to read the Heller decision. The Armalite Rifle 15 is a semi automatic rifle meaning it fires every time one pulls the trigger. It is NOT an assault weapon nor is is a weapon of war any more than a lever action Winchester Model 94. Hate to say it but there are over 400 million guns in America and there is absolutely no way one can wave a magic wand and make them all disappear. The bigger problem is the disgraceful lack of mental health resources and the total breakdown of the family unit. But nobody wants to spend money on that since “gun control” is a much more visceral argument that can be broken up into better sound bites. DO I feel the need to own an Armalite RIfle 15?? No not really but can you say that it is more dangerous than a bolt action rifle in 5.56 in the hands of someone who knows how to use it.
As a friend in the ACLU ones remarked, The 2nd Amendment is the carbuncle in the bill of rights but it is still there, like it or not
It is, nevertheless, an instrument of war, a high-velocity weapon intended for one purpose: taking human lives. It was designed for the military for use by the military. Period. While not technically an “assault” weapon, it can hold clips of 15, 30, 42, or even up to 100 rounds. But when it is used to slaughter defenseless elementary and high school children, then it is, in every sense of the word, an “assault” weapon. Period.
As for the sacred 2nd Amendment, the US Supreme Court just last week gutted the 6th Amendment, so what makes the 2nd so inviolable?
https://www.thetrace.org/2017/02/assault-rifles-ban-ar-15-weapon-of-war/
Everyone recognizes how bad the situation is now with 400 million or so guns in circulation but it didn’t get this way overnight. It got this way because of decades of inaction. It’ll take decades to correct and we have to start some where. The argument that any sensible gun regulation is just the beginning of the some kind of mass government confiscation of guns is ignorant paranoia. There is no conceivable scenario under which that could happen. No one is seriously proposing it. Absolutely no one. Nor can you identify all mentally unstable people before they do something mentally unstable. That’s just a small part of the answer, not the entire answer. And “breakdown of the family unit” might explain some kinds of gun violence but I seriously doubt there is any data linking multiple school shooters to a breakdown of their family unit. The Columbine shooters both came from two parent families and the Sandy Hook shooter was taken to the shooting range by his mother. The Uvalde shooter lived with his grandmother and shot her before going to the school and even though he didn’t live with his parents it wasn’t because his parents didn’t have a place for him to live. That argument, like the confiscation argument, exists only to distract from the real issue which is the ease with which anyone at all can purchase a weapon designed to kill as many people as possible as quickly as possible and then go out and do just that with it.
Paul, Thank You for putting your thoughts down. I would like to add that I HAVE contacted my Federal Representatives including Cassidy after his feral hogs use for an AK47/AR15 or similar item. The quick comment I would like to add is NO NEED to have any one lose there weapon. What is needed is in part what every federal migratory waterfowl hunter has, is a weapon that is limited to holding only three shells before they can be reloaded. Like my double barrel shotgun which needed a part repaired the guns and large magazines can be modified by our gun smiths to limit the capacity of the weapon. NOT overnight but with time limits as your reasonable timeline writing might suggest. Would there be some that might be secretive? We recently found a bazooka shell hidden in the wall of a former WWII vet. Surely there are other items like Clay-more mines from the Vietnam era or a Hand-grenade from Korea, But they stay in their hidden place. The result is firearms that are actually defensive in nature or truly focused for hunting. In this way NO ONE loses their weapon and as has happened too often, escape or overpowering when the gun has jammed or run out of shells. Thanks for my opportunity to share my thoughts and thanks for your important reply putting this important issue in perspective. PS The ATF is halted by law from safety research but a non lethal cell phone may require my fingerprint swipe to unlock….Think how many children would already been saved by the required modification/installation of that single improvement. Thanks again…
Sorry to have to reply. Please understand my draft quality as I have also and already written my Republican federal representative. I agree to the bringing up the meanings in the 2nd Amendment. For that as taught in Civic Class one must look to the discussion during the committee and debates to assure its actual meaning. I would love to know. One thing is for sure the weapons of their day were so pathetic the armies lined up shoulder to shoulder and ended up very close together. That slow to reload, low velocity, single shot weapon was the latest and best. Yes they had cannons which could do real damage but the thought that one could own one has been long settled before my 71 year life. What should be noted from some one that is both a hunter and has no less than 7 guns in his home is that we have few deaths per year from the following: WWll;bazooka shells, Korea; hand grenades, Vietnam; Clay-more mines. or Iraq; 155 Howitzer shells….Certainly there are some in our country as found in the wall of a passed WWll veterain. We might add we have little deaths from Putin’s nuclear or North Korea Poisons. Because the moment they are discovered they are eliminated…Same for Blasting caps and large fertilizer purchases. The 5.56 is a powerful weapon in any appearance. But the limit of the magazine is what is important. My Shotgun must be limited to holding only 3 shots when hunting waterfowl. That is right to give them a chance. One may remember how often it is when the gun jams or the shooter needs to reload that THEN the opportunity to escape of overpower has occurred. If one can limit the number of rounds in my shotgun or in a magazine one can start to limit the unnecessary carnage. Final of many other relevant points. It is found that many other countries have doors in their schools, bars and even places of worship. But apparently France, England, Belgium and the rest of the world just doesn’t have the extreme mental.health problem of the greatest country on earth….. Maybe it because we have too loose laws like irrelevant background checks that stop 30000 appliers that then just go to a gun swap. Or allow the possession of unnecessary large clips or the manufacture of toy guns the look like the real or the undermining of ATF to do research like the easy to use built in cell phone finger recognition locks found on non-deadly cell phones…..Thanks for your time