Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Gun Control & RKBA
In reply to the discussion: What did the Founders mean... [View all]discntnt_irny_srcsm
(18,591 posts)79. Well, that's a wise question to ask.
The body of the preamble from the BoR makes clear the objective of the Founders. The text of the rights as articulated and passed was drawn mainly from George Mason's Virginia Declaration of Rights. Mason proposed the Bill of Rights be added to the original Constitution. Several states required the inclusion of a Bill of Rights in their conditional ratifications of the Constitution.
In the excerpted text I have highlighted via underline three reasons for and characterizations of the Bill of Rights. For those who suggest that the 2A (or any of those ten articles) are useful to somehow limit individual rights, I suggest that they read and ponder the paragraphs below and the entire BoR.
https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/bill-of-rights-transcript#toc-the-u-s-bill-of-rights
THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.
RESOLVED by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, two thirds of both Houses concurring, that the following Articles be proposed to the Legislatures of the several States, as amendments to the Constitution of the United States, all, or any of which Articles, when ratified by three fourths of the said Legislatures, to be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of the said Constitution; viz.
ARTICLES in addition to, and Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, proposed by Congress, and ratified by the Legislatures of the several States, pursuant to the fifth Article of the original Constitution.
THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.
RESOLVED by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, two thirds of both Houses concurring, that the following Articles be proposed to the Legislatures of the several States, as amendments to the Constitution of the United States, all, or any of which Articles, when ratified by three fourths of the said Legislatures, to be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of the said Constitution; viz.
ARTICLES in addition to, and Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, proposed by Congress, and ratified by the Legislatures of the several States, pursuant to the fifth Article of the original Constitution.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
102 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
So the French Navy was just there for show? Funny, I could've sworn it was them who ensured victory.
malchickiwick
Jun 2017
#4
US history is rife with examples of our leaders' mistakes and even crimes
discntnt_irny_srcsm
Jun 2017
#10
This reply doesn't say anything about your thoughts on the subject...
discntnt_irny_srcsm
Jun 2017
#18
Did you also note that 'everyone' else who isn't in the NG, is also a member of the militia?
jmg257
Jun 2017
#28
Meh- a prolix, badly formatted argumentum ad populum *and* sheer Colonism:
friendly_iconoclast
Aug 2017
#93
The government "...derives its just powers from the consent of the governed..." n/t
discntnt_irny_srcsm
Jun 2017
#11
History is filled with examples of people oppressed by Leaders who abuse their power
MedusaX
Jun 2017
#7
I can't say it better than most of the posters above have already said, but will add
Alea
Jun 2017
#8
Generally, Hamilton is good on this, yet his notion of a select militia didn't come about for
jmg257
Jun 2017
#9
Not really arguing anything, Jim - pointing out it is quite easy to know what the founders meant
jmg257
Jul 2017
#40
You have the right to express your opinion using any method available before 1792
friendly_iconoclast
Jul 2017
#41
If that's true, then why aren't single shot firearms recommended over "self loading" models...
Marengo
Jul 2017
#45
"...(S)omething we do not need in modern society" Would that be the royal 'we', or...
friendly_iconoclast
Jul 2017
#46
A) GC&RKBA is not an 'amen chorus', and B) none of that bears upon what I posted
friendly_iconoclast
Jul 2017
#58
Your opinion is welcome, however it is nonsensical and there is no obligation for anyone to accept..
Marengo
Jul 2017
#55
"Revolvers are for people who display poor marksmanship or who intend to kill multiple times."
friendly_iconoclast
Jul 2017
#47
Should the government prevent the ownership of word processing software? It postdates 1793...
Marengo
Jul 2017
#57
So, you're ok with me having a 20 shot semi-auto .68 caliber rifle then?
AtheistCrusader
Aug 2017
#95
Perfect! And this is yet another point that restriction supporters will never grasp.
pablo_marmol
Aug 2017
#90