American second Amendment gun rights?

Question

American second Amendment states "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. " since a Militia can have five somewhat different meanings:

1, Defense activity when it is defense of the public, its territory, property, and laws
2, The entire able-bodied male population of a community, town, or state, which can be called to arms against an invading enemy, to enforce the law, or to respond to a disaster
3, A private, non-government force, not necessarily directly supported or sanctioned by its government
4, An official reserve army, composed of citizen soldiers,
5, The national police forces

Should guns be allowed to be carried whilst the USA isn't at risk of loosing the security of a free State?

Answer 1

It is sometimes instructive to read the thoughts of those who were involved in writing the Bill of Rights. (and a few others I found illuminating)

The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that's good.
-- George Washington
The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed.
--Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers at 184-188

To preserve liberty it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them.
-- Richard Henry Lee

[A]rms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. ... Horrid mischief would ensue were [the law-abiding] deprived the use of them.
-- Thomas Paine

It is your responsibility to protect yourself and your family from criminals. If you rely on the government for protection, you are going to be at least disappointed and at worst injured or killed.
-- from A Message from the Sheriff on the back of a victims' rights pamphlet
by five-term San Miguel County Sheriff Bill Masters (L) of Telluride, Colorado

Laws that forbid the carrying of arms…disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes…Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.
-- Thomas Jefferson, "Commonplace Book," 1774-1776,
quoting from On Crimes and Punishment, by criminologist Cesare Beccaria, 1764.

Answer 2

The "The right to bear arms" is part of the United States Bill of Rights. It can't be removed, but can only be amended. Guns don't kill people. People kill people. A responsible owner can keep a gun for the rest of his natural life without even getting someone killed. The point of giving the this right to every American citizen is for self-defense (especially after the American Revolution, in response to Great Britain back then). The biggest flaw in that law is that it does not have any restriction on what type of firearm a citizen can own. It can range from a simple hand gun to a full automatic assault rifle. But then, it all comes down to responsibility along with an intensive background check of the prospective owner before releasing an approval to own a firearm. I've seen cases wherein a wonderful family gets a home invasion and they had nothing to defend themselves with but kitchen knives and a baseball bat. If you were in that situation, don't you think you'd rather have a gun? You'd do everything you can to keep your family safe since law enforcers can't be around all the time. Like I said earlier, it all comes down to the responsibility. But yet, don't ever think that all Americans are gun lovers. Not all Americans do. Some are against guns, and some are not. Yet, every American has the right to own one.

Answer 3

There is the possibility of losing this free state, and that is if the mainstream assholes who vote these idiots into Congress and the White House aren't careful about who they put in charge. Its about time someone voted for a candidate not in the democrat or republican parties.

These jack-asses are all the same and all them want the government to be the most powerful entity in this country. They want the government to tell us how to live our lives and what we can and cannot do on a daily basis. They want the government to take our earned money away and use it on stupid programs and wars that do the country nor the world a damn bit of good. They are all the same, except they differ on how they will go about telling you what to do.

That my friend does not sound like a very free state to me. So yes, I think we should carry guns and we should have militias and we should stand up and protect what is rightfully ours in conjunction with what the Constitution of this great nation says. Thanks and have a nice day.

Answer 4

Defense activity when it is defense of the public, its territory, property, and laws


How else are we going to defend public, it territory, property, and laws??

Property is not defined in this statement which could be ones personal property etc.


As for the first answer militias are normally not formed until needed. And who do you think makes up a militia???? THE PUBLIC.

Answer 5

You just totally missed the part where all it says is, and I quote what you just wrote, "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. " "The People" meaning the common ordinary citizens. When the phrase, "the people" is used in any other legal documentation it is always refering to the citizenry of the city, county, state or country.
Since comma's are used in that sentence it appears to me that those are separate statements clarifying different roles of the second amendment and bringing it together in one sentence.

You gun control people lose it everytime a whacko goes ballistic and kills people.
How many people did Jim Jones kill without firing a single shot?

Answer 6

"Should guns be allowed to be carried whilst the USA isn't at risk of loosing the security of a free State?"

Assuming that is the entire reason behind the 2nd amendment, how would one know at what time the security becomes at risk? Why not arm yourself for that purpose BEFORE the risk occurs rather than after?

Answer 7

THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED<<< does not leave it only to the first sentence to a malitia type army. YES guns should be allowed to be carried and yes we are at risk of losing the security of a free state..
stopthenorthamericanunion, saveamericafund.org

Answer 8

Yes, people should be allowed to carry a gun for self defense. If you ask me, if you need a gun for self defense, then you have bigger problems.

Answer 9

Me, I'm just looking for the "well regulated militia" all these people are members of.