The Second Amendment

The Second Amendment: “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.” What were “arms” or “weapons” in 1791, at the time of its ratification? A, single-shot musket, rifle, or pistol; a bomb, a canon, a sword, a knife, an ax, a spear, a club, a crossbow, a bow and arrow, and farm implements?

Did our forefathers’ “Right to Bear Arms” intend to give citizens the right to mass kill and injure with semiautomatic rifles and pistols with multiple shot ability? What kind of arms do our citizens really need?

Pursuant to the stated intent of the Second Amendment, is not being a member of a “Well Regulated Militia” a condition precedent to the right of a ditizen to possess and bear arms? In present times are not a citizen-authorized city, county, or state police force, National Guard, and our federal Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force, and Coast Guard, considered to be well-regulated free-state protection? Do the thinking and needs of our citizens of 1791 really correspond to 2016?

As to self-defense and hunting, how much killing power is needed? The time has come to consider the consequences and unintended consequences of the right of citizens to bear arms, as well as intelligent limiting regulations in respect thereto. The unconscionable gun deaths and injuries cannot go on — 2015: 13,286 killed and 26,879 injured; 2016: so far, 6,949 killed and 14,322 injured. What price our people?

Be succinct, constructive, and relevant to the story. Leaving a comment means you agree to our Discussion Guidelines. We like civilized discourse. We don't like spam, lying, profanity, harassment or personal attacks.

comments powered by Disqus
event calendar sponsored by: