|
slvemike4u -> RE: 2nd Amendment and Strict Constructionists (10/9/2009 12:39:30 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: GoDolphins
As someone with a history degree who had to study the Constitution a lot, this topic caught my attention. The fact is the Founding Fathers were almost unanimous in their belief that the people should be allowed to own guns. There were 2 reasons for this. Number one, most people back then fed themselves, and for those who lived in rural areas, which was the majority of the population, part of that involved hunting. The second reason was the bigger reason though. The British had taken arms from the colonists prior to the Revolution and stored them in silos to prevent the colonists from rebelling (or try to anyway, obviously it didn't work). In fact, the battles at Concord and Lexington in Massachussetts that ultimately started the Revolution started because British troops went to seize firearms from some farmers in Massachussetts and they were tipped off--you know, Paul Revere and the lanterns and "the British are coming" and all that. So the Founding Fathers saw a direct correlation between government seizing firearms and tyranny.
Now, would they have the same views if they saw the kinds of weapons we have today? It's impossible to tell of course. That's why I'm a believer that we should have some regulations on owning firearms, but outright banning them, as some cities have done, should probably remain unconstitutional. I don't really think the average citizen needs a rocket launcher but don't like the idea of the government banning handguns. If they're going to do that they better assign a bodyguard to protect us all because the police can't be everywhere at once, and I don't really think we want them to, but that's another discussion for another time.
One other thing to note here. Someone early on the first page mentioned a discussion about whether or not the 2nd amendment refers to the National Guard or not. The National Guard wasn't formed until the early 1900's (don't know the exact date). So that is clearly not what the Constitution meant. The National Guard was formed to try to regulate the militia, which I think would have sent up all kinds of red flags to many of the Founding Fathers, but I can't say that for sure. The militia, at the very least, was not ever supposed to be government-run though.
A couple of points here....Concord and Lexington were not engagements brought about by an attempt to disarm "farmers"....in point of fact the British were in search of arms caches...in other words they were trying to disarm rebel arm stashes not "farmers"
Second point here is that I lnow of no city in the United States that has banned guns,,,,,restricted posession within city limits ....yes.Citizens of New York City and Chicago (hell any city You care to name) may own and indeed posess firearms.....as long as said guns are outside city limits...like at the hunting lodge and such.
Small points to be sure ....but it is getting late and I'm tired and just a little nit pickety.
|
|
|
|
