6 ms·

The 2nd Amendment does speak of a well regulated militia and it being necessary for the defense of the United States. I'm in favor a well regulated militia. I

The 2nd Amendment does speak of a well regulated militia and it being necessary for the defense of the United States. I'm in favor a well regulated militia. I'm not a lawyer and have no expertise on the legalities but I do know that amendments can be repealed. There is nothing unconstitutional about repealing an amendment. The Constitution details the mechanism for amending it.

4d66ba06 9y ago
This podcast episode on the Second Amendment was fascinating as it discusses how the US Courts interpretation of the second amendment changed http://www.radiolab.org/story/radiolab-presents-more-perfect-gun-show/ http://www.radiolab.org/story/radiolab-presents-more-perfect...
- yequalsx 9y ago
  Thank you for the link. I'll listen to it later.
  - jakeogh 9y ago
    Justice Antonin Scalia reads Heller(2008) for the majority: https://s3.amazonaws.com/oyez.case-media.ogg/case_data/2007/07-290/20080626o_07-290.ogg https://s3.amazonaws.com/oyez.case-media.ogg/case_data/2007/... https://www.oyez.org/cases/2007/07-290 https://www.oyez.org/cases/2007/07-290
zombieprocesses 9y ago
> There is nothing unconstitutional about repealing an amendment. The Constitution details the mechanism for amending it. I didn't say it was unconstitutional. The constitution makes it very difficult to repeal for a reason. It's why only 1 amendment has ever been repealed and that amendment was written nearly 150 years after the founding of the country. I'm fairly certain that the 1st and 2nd amendment are pretty much untouchable. But I wish you the best in trying to get it repealed. The more you try to get it repealed, the more people will support the 2nd amendment and remind people that we actually have rights that we need to protect lest it be taken from us.
- yequalsx 9y ago
  I grew up a Reagan Republican in the Canal Zone. At that time I never thought I would see the U.S. (much less conservatives) embrace torture, mass surveillance, things like the Patriot Act, renditions, and other such things that have become commonplace. People haven't been particularly assertive of their right to free speech. Few complained when Clinton instituted "free speech" zones at major political events. Now such is commonplace. It does not stretch my imagination to see people being fed up with it being legal to own firearms with the lethality that is currently allowable. I may be wrong. Fight for your rights. Be vigilant. I will continue to advocate for repealing the right to own guns. I may never see my vision come to fruition.
humanrebar 9y ago
> I'm in favor a well regulated militia. So people can have guns as long as they're in a "well-regulated militia"? Do we want all gun owners to be in self-governed militias? I don't follow this line of thought.
- yequalsx 9y ago
  The second amendment states that a well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. I’m no expert on the legalities and legal interpretations of the 2nd amendment but it seems to me a case could be made that well regulated gives the government broad regulatory powers. The mention of militia could be interpreted to mean only members of the militia, clearly under the command of the military, can own guns. Of course a repeal of the amendment would be fine with me too.
  - humanrebar 9y ago
    The Battles of Lexington and Concord were fought to keep "the military" (British troops) from taking weapons away from arguably "self-regulated" militias. I think it's a tough case to make if you're arguing that the Constitution was referring solely to current members of armed services commissioned by the government.
    - yequalsx 9y ago
      Those militias were under the control of the colonial government. Indeed one of the colonials killed at Lexington was an ensign. That militia was the army at the time.
      - humanrebar 9y ago
        To complete the thought experiment, what would we have to do to form our own militia? Have a charter and elections? The colonial army at the time was not sanctioned by the king to bear the arms it did.
splintercell 9y ago
"well regulated" meant "well functioning". Like "a well regulated clock". > There is nothing unconstitutional about repealing an amendment. The Constitution details the mechanism for amending it. You really think you can get 34 states to vote to repeal something from our bill of rights? If you are a democrat mastermind and want to do that then your best bet is to get more and more states created out of the blue states to get more than 2/3rd of the states to vote to repeal 2nd Amendment.

4d66ba06 9y ago

This podcast episode on the Second Amendment was fascinating as it discusses how the US Courts interpretation of the second amendment changed http://www.radiolab.org/story/radiolab-presents-more-perfect-gun-show/ http://www.radiolab.org/story/radiolab-presents-more-perfect...

yequalsx 9y ago
Thank you for the link. I'll listen to it later.
- jakeogh 9y ago
  Justice Antonin Scalia reads Heller(2008) for the majority: https://s3.amazonaws.com/oyez.case-media.ogg/case_data/2007/07-290/20080626o_07-290.ogg https://s3.amazonaws.com/oyez.case-media.ogg/case_data/2007/... https://www.oyez.org/cases/2007/07-290 https://www.oyez.org/cases/2007/07-290

zombieprocesses 9y ago

> There is nothing unconstitutional about repealing an amendment. The Constitution details the mechanism for amending it. I didn't say it was unconstitutional. The constitution makes it very difficult to repeal for a reason. It's why only 1 amendment has ever been repealed and that amendment was written nearly 150 years after the founding of the country. I'm fairly certain that the 1st and 2nd amendment are pretty much untouchable. But I wish you the best in trying to get it repealed. The more you try to get it repealed, the more people will support the 2nd amendment and remind people that we actually have rights that we need to protect lest it be taken from us.

yequalsx 9y ago
I grew up a Reagan Republican in the Canal Zone. At that time I never thought I would see the U.S. (much less conservatives) embrace torture, mass surveillance, things like the Patriot Act, renditions, and other such things that have become commonplace. People haven't been particularly assertive of their right to free speech. Few complained when Clinton instituted "free speech" zones at major political events. Now such is commonplace. It does not stretch my imagination to see people being fed up with it being legal to own firearms with the lethality that is currently allowable. I may be wrong. Fight for your rights. Be vigilant. I will continue to advocate for repealing the right to own guns. I may never see my vision come to fruition.

humanrebar 9y ago

> I'm in favor a well regulated militia. So people can have guns as long as they're in a "well-regulated militia"? Do we want all gun owners to be in self-governed militias? I don't follow this line of thought.

yequalsx 9y ago
The second amendment states that a well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. I’m no expert on the legalities and legal interpretations of the 2nd amendment but it seems to me a case could be made that well regulated gives the government broad regulatory powers. The mention of militia could be interpreted to mean only members of the militia, clearly under the command of the military, can own guns. Of course a repeal of the amendment would be fine with me too.
- humanrebar 9y ago
  The Battles of Lexington and Concord were fought to keep "the military" (British troops) from taking weapons away from arguably "self-regulated" militias. I think it's a tough case to make if you're arguing that the Constitution was referring solely to current members of armed services commissioned by the government.
  - yequalsx 9y ago
    Those militias were under the control of the colonial government. Indeed one of the colonials killed at Lexington was an ensign. That militia was the army at the time.
    - humanrebar 9y ago
      To complete the thought experiment, what would we have to do to form our own militia? Have a charter and elections? The colonial army at the time was not sanctioned by the king to bear the arms it did.

splintercell 9y ago

"well regulated" meant "well functioning". Like "a well regulated clock". > There is nothing unconstitutional about repealing an amendment. The Constitution details the mechanism for amending it. You really think you can get 34 states to vote to repeal something from our bill of rights? If you are a democrat mastermind and want to do that then your best bet is to get more and more states created out of the blue states to get more than 2/3rd of the states to vote to repeal 2nd Amendment.