What are your feelings on the second amendment?

Question

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.

Answer 1

I believe that at one time this was necessary to the constitution, but now it only contributes to the crime rate.

Answer 2

Well, it's a broad stroke, and certainly the Founding Fathers had no idea what would come in the future. I can get behind the right for people to have and keep firearms. I do NOT think that we as civilians need access to assault rifles and armor piercing ammo.

Ironically, the "militia" that was necessary to a the security fo a free State was largely to empower the people against the Government's army. Initially, we had the King's army to deal with, and wanted to make sure that elected Kings knew that the people were armed.

And yet these days, if some people decided that the government was becoming too totalitarian and decided to change things, then the Army would be sent it. And if they people fought back with their 2nd Amendment approved firearms, the Army would destroy them utterly.

Answer 3

I believe that the Second Amendment is very easy to twist to your own beliefs. I say this because the text of the Amendment reads "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms". In my opinion, that does not mean that anyone who pleases may own and use a gun whenever they please. A gun is a deadly weapon. As such, it should be treated with as much care as possible. Under no circumstances should guns be allowed to go unlicensed. If a person does use a weapon, they must have appropriate reasons. The use of a weapon should be limited to hunting (there are already laws in place here), self-defense, defense of personal property under appropriate circumstances, military uses, and recreational shooting in a controlled environment. I will point out that no law regulating firearms has ever been struck down by the Supreme Court as a violation of the Second Amendment. Regulation does not necessarily mean a violation of the rights under the Second Amendment.

Answer 4

The Second Amendment doesn't state we have the right to arm ourselves; just that we have the right to have a militia. The National Guard is the oldest arm of the U.S. armed forces, dating back to 1636. The Guard originally took the form of state militias up through the Civil War, when individual units were referred to as belonging to their parent states (ie. 5th Virginia, or 15th Maine). Soon after the end of the Civil War the individual state militias were nationalized into the Army's second line of reserves (after the Army Reserves), The Army National Guard.
Nowadays, there are Air National Guard (Air Force) units, as well.
When Congress does its rounds of base closings, they are prevented from the 2nd Amendment from eliminating the last of a state's Guard units.

Answer 5

All of the Constitution and it's Amendments should be upheld as long as the United States is a country, without waiver! That is what makes this country great! If we erode any of the doctrines, we run the risk of eroding the all!

Answer 6

My feelings is that it is a good thing. Many will disagree with me I am sure - but when someone is breaking into their home, having a shotgun and just racking the round into chamber can and has changed the mind of more than one burglar........

Answer 7

Totally agree. Gun control only allows big brother to control and attack, and without arms, I would be defenseless.
***
I agree with starcent, as well; Properly licensed and accounted for. I don't think that just any yahoo out there should be able tote around a gun.