DevinWKuska
Regular Member
I have a question for anyone interested. What do you believe the 2nd amendment to mean? I know many consider this amendment to mean we the people have the right to carry firearms. Such as
(In 2008 and 2010, the Supreme Court issued two Second Amendment decisions. In District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), the Court ruled that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess a firearm, unconnected to service in a militia[1][2] and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
However my understanding is that the ORIGNAL 2nd Amendment was this:
As passed by the Congress:
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.
As ratified by the States:
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.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
Dont get me wrong I own many long guns as well as 2 sidearms(handguns). But I am concerned that people are warping its meaning. I do not believe this was necessarily intended to mean everyone should have the right to carry a weapon(although i understand back then rifles were considered hunting tools). I have heard in the past that every state has a regulated militia and I am not a member. SO should I REALLY be able to carry firearms? This question boggles my mind. In one hand I dont think I would willingly give up any firearm. On the other hand I would like to think I would surrender a firearm to preserve the true meaning of the constitution. The Government already twists and warps the Constitution to say what they want it to. I would like to be on the honest side. I would appreciate your thoughts, but please try to be objective.
(In 2008 and 2010, the Supreme Court issued two Second Amendment decisions. In District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), the Court ruled that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess a firearm, unconnected to service in a militia[1][2] and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
However my understanding is that the ORIGNAL 2nd Amendment was this:
As passed by the Congress:
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.
As ratified by the States:
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.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
Dont get me wrong I own many long guns as well as 2 sidearms(handguns). But I am concerned that people are warping its meaning. I do not believe this was necessarily intended to mean everyone should have the right to carry a weapon(although i understand back then rifles were considered hunting tools). I have heard in the past that every state has a regulated militia and I am not a member. SO should I REALLY be able to carry firearms? This question boggles my mind. In one hand I dont think I would willingly give up any firearm. On the other hand I would like to think I would surrender a firearm to preserve the true meaning of the constitution. The Government already twists and warps the Constitution to say what they want it to. I would like to be on the honest side. I would appreciate your thoughts, but please try to be objective.