ANSWERS: 9
  • It means that you have to belong to a formal militia group before you can possess firearms! In New York the Militia is a reserve component for the state police!
  • The right of the People to keep and bear arms is an essential element in ensuring that the power of the Government never exceeds the power of the People.
  • It has become both a standing military and a right for folks to own guns/ammo. I agree with that.
  • I have always wanted to promulgate regulations for a Felons Militia, because the text does not say "regulated" by who or how. For me I would like to keep and arm bears, but that has to do with my dyslexia, I think. I think the in the '80's if the Freemen had published "regulations" they might have made it stand up in court and if not, had reason to call for armed revolution. ".... land of the free and home of the brave" we have become neither, no longer free and are no longer Brave. Mr. Bush and Chaney ... Be afraid and cede your freedom to us because "we have more facts"RMN-1970. If you put a frog into boiling water he will jump out but if you put one in cold water and turn on the burner he will let himself be boiled. So to the american public, and God help us the Professional military, when the public was drafted the Puppet Masters of the state needed to fear the masses, no longer.
  • this statement is sort of elusive ... do you have to belong to a militia in order to keep and bear arms? all people? tell me about the right of the people to stand up to the military - our very first president took a military force to western pennsylvania to assure that the government could tax whiskey! the military was never supposed to be used against us, but, it was then. . i completely agree with it. i value this right and believe that it is necessary for americans to keep and bear arms.
  • I realise that this is a quote from the 2nd Amendment to the US Constitution, and I'm sure that you know that I'm not an American, but a citizen of a country where the people have no such right to bear arms. My answer may not, therefore, be pertinent. However, the differences between our two countries "divided by a common language" is a source of never-ending fascination to me, so here goes with an outsider's view. It seems to me to stem from two things - the well-established principal in England (dating from the reign of King Henry II in the 12th Century) that the citizenry MUST bear arms for public defence, coupled with the desire of the (pre-American Revolution) British Government's wish to disarm the American people, so they would be easier to keep in check - a scheme that, to the best of my knowledge had never been proposed in Britain itself. Had it not been for this British scheme it would probably never have occured to the writers of the Constitution and its Amendments that the right to bear arms should be clearly stated, therefore you can probably thank the British for this important part of your Constitution and way of life. I also believe that the idea of an armed militia in Britain had already died a death, because the British had a well-established army and navy. This makes it easy for me to see that one of the reasons for the Second Amendment was to stand up to government. However, this reason is no longer valid because the US government has armed forces vastly superior to anything "the people" could muster in the form of militias. Therefore I think that the preamble could be safely omitted and it could start with "The right of the peopleto keep and bear arms". As to whether I agree, I am not in a position to agree or disagree. I would say, however, that the right for US citizens to bear arms is so strongly entrenched that it is hardly likely to be changed in the foreseeable future.
  • It's basically a long winded way of saying "police force should be in charge of state security". The people have the right to bear arms - not munitions. Meaning pitchforks, swords and axes are all the people need as a backup should the police force fail them.
  • not sure but i dont keep guns around and i hate them
  • It means that the citizen soldiers or "militia", is the last ditch defense of our country and our way of life. It has nothing to do with the govt "granting" us this right. It is all about the common defense. As a former soldier in the Vietnam war, I saw firsthand how the citizen soldiers of that nation defeated both France and then the USA and sent them out of their country in defeat. Farmers by day and soldiers by night, armed with anything they could shoot. They defeated the most powerful nation in the world with armed citizens, and a will to win, regardless of the costs. I do believe in the 2nd amendment, because it is what protects all the rest of the bill of rights.

Copyright 2020, Wired Ivy, LLC

Answerbag | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy