SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Impeach George W. Bush -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: TigerPaw who wrote (4159)7/6/2001 12:38:50 AM
From: ManyMoose  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 93284
 
There is no such requirement.

One does not have to belong to a well regulated militia in order to have the right to keep and bear arms. The militia clause is merely one, and not the only, rationale for preserving the right. The Founders were expressing a preference for a militia over a standing army. Even if today's well regulated militia were the National Guard, the Second Amendment still protects an individual right to keep and bear arms.

There is no evidence from the writings of the Founding Fathers, early American legal commentators, or pre-twentieth century Supreme Court decisions, indicating that the Second Amendment applied only to members of a well regulated militia or that the sole purpose of this amendment was to preserve the right of states to keep their militias.



To: TigerPaw who wrote (4159)7/6/2001 10:42:40 PM
From: Lazarus_Long  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 93284
 
Ah, but the 2nd Amendment is a RESTRICTION on federal power, not a grant of power to the federal government!