• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

How Do YOU Interpret The 2nd Amendment? [W:199:2834]

Re: How Do YOU Interpret The 2nd Amendment? [W:199]

danielpalos said:
Only, those Individuals of the People who are specifically connected with Militia service, well regulated, as indicated by what is Necessary to the security of a free State, in the first clause.
Click to expand...

Incorrect. That's not what it says.

Try again. Whose right does it say shall not be infringed?
 
Re: How Do YOU Interpret The 2nd Amendment? [W:199]

danielpalos said:
Only those Individuals of the People who are specifically connected with militia service, well regulated. Any questions?
Click to expand...

Wrong again. That's not what it says.

Whose right does it say shall not be infringed? Come on, it's right there. I'm trying to make this as easy as possible. Look again:

"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."
 
Re: How Do YOU Interpret The 2nd Amendment? [W:199]

Federalist said:
Wrong again. That's not what it says.

Whose right does it say shall not be infringed? Come on, it's right there. I'm trying to make this as easy as possible. Look again:

"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."
Click to expand...


The Context is; A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, and not any part of the general welfare, clause.
 
Re: How Do YOU Interpret The 2nd Amendment? [W:199]

danielpalos said:
The Context is; A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, and not any part of the general welfare, clause.
Click to expand...

Come on. Now you're getting distracted. Look again:

"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."

The right of whom?
 
Re: How Do YOU Interpret The 2nd Amendment? [W:199]

Federalist said:
Come on. Now you're getting distracted. Look again:

"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."

The right of whom?
Click to expand...

The People who are specifically connected with militia service, well regulated. Any questions?
 
Re: How Do YOU Interpret The 2nd Amendment? [W:199]

All people are the militia.

Huuuuur, any questions?
 
Re: How Do YOU Interpret The 2nd Amendment? [W:199]

danielpalos said:
The People who are specifically connected with militia service, well regulated. Any questions?
Click to expand...

Yes, I have a question. Where does it say "the people who are specifically connected with militia service, well regulated"?
 
Re: How Do YOU Interpret The 2nd Amendment? [W:199]

scatt said:
All people are the militia.

Huuuuur, any questions?
Click to expand...

Nope, just clarification; our Second Amendment specifically enumerates not just any Body of the People, but a well regulated Militia of the People as necessary to the security of a free State; it must apply to Only that subset of the People. Any questions?
 
Re: How Do YOU Interpret The 2nd Amendment? [W:199]

And of course the "right" of the people to keep and bear arms. Ignoring it will not make it go away.
 
Re: How Do YOU Interpret The 2nd Amendment? [W:199]

Federalist said:
Correct. The people.
Click to expand...

Not all of the People are well regulated; thus, the specific enumeration in the first clause provides the context for the second clause.

There are two rules of construction, dictated by plain reason, as well as founded on legal axioms. The one is, that every part of the expression ought, if possible, to be allowed some meaning, and be made to conspire to some common end. The other is, that where the several parts cannot be made to coincide, the less important should give way to the more important part; the means should be sacrificed to the end, rather than the end to the means.
Click to expand...
 
Re: How Do YOU Interpret The 2nd Amendment? [W:199]

There is no requirement for the people to be well regulated (well armed), silly goose.
 
Re: How Do YOU Interpret The 2nd Amendment? [W:199]

scatt said:
And of course the "right" of the people to keep and bear arms. Ignoring it will not make it go away.
Click to expand...

Rights in private property which may include the class called Arms, are already secured in State Constitutions and available via Due Process.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Click to expand...
 
Re: How Do YOU Interpret The 2nd Amendment? [W:199]

scatt said:
There is no requirement for the people to be well regulated (well armed), silly goose.
Click to expand...

Yes, there is if they want literal recourse to our Second Amendment.

I love it when DP chics call me a silly goose.
 
Re: How Do YOU Interpret The 2nd Amendment? [W:199]

danielpalos said:
Not all of the People are well regulated; thus, the specific enumeration in the first clause provides the context for the second clause.
Click to expand...

It says "the people", it doesn't say "the people that are well regulated"

"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."
 
Re: How Do YOU Interpret The 2nd Amendment? [W:199]

danielpalos said:
Yes, there is if they want literal recourse to our Second Amendment.
Click to expand...

No, the second amendment speaks of the people, with no requirement for "well regulated," while also claiming those people, who are not required to be well regulated (well armed), have the "right" to keep and bear arms (any and all weapons available to the state and its military), and are not required to be well regulated.
 
Re: How Do YOU Interpret The 2nd Amendment? [W:199]

scatt said:
No, the second amendment speaks of the people, with no requirement for "well regulated," while also claiming those people, who are not required to be well regulated (well armed), have the "right" to keep and bear arms (any and all weapons available to the state and its military), and are not required to be well regulated.
Click to expand...

Nope; that interpretation is not current practice in our republic or even well regulated militias would be subject to paragraph (2) of DC v. Heller. Any questions, DP chic?
 
Re: How Do YOU Interpret The 2nd Amendment? [W:199]

I find it odd that you support any and all current laws.

Huuuur, any questions.
 
Re: How Do YOU Interpret The 2nd Amendment? [W:199]

Federalist said:
It says "the people", it doesn't say "the people that are well regulated"

"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."
Click to expand...

The People are the Militia of the United States; and, Only one subset of the People who are the Militia of the United States, is specifically enumerated in our Second Amendment.
 
Re: How Do YOU Interpret The 2nd Amendment? [W:199]

danielpalos said:
The People are the Militia of the United States; and, Only one subset of the People who are the Militia of the United States, is specifically enumerated in our Second Amendment.
Click to expand...

No, the people are the people.
 
Re: How Do YOU Interpret The 2nd Amendment? [W:199]

danielpalos said:
I support our supreme laws of the land as a civil Person in our republic.
Click to expand...

Except for the law saying that the people have a right to keep and bear arms.
 
Re: How Do YOU Interpret The 2nd Amendment? [W:199]

Federalist said:
No, the people are the people.
Click to expand...

How did you reach your conclusion?

From 10USC311
The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
Click to expand...

Any questions?
 
Re: How Do YOU Interpret The 2nd Amendment? [W:199]

The people are the militia, yes. You finally got it, and any deviation from this in the future is admission of trolling based upon personal and emotional wants specifically created by you and only you for personal and emotional reasons based upon nothing but your own personal and emotional wants.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom