What rights do we have under the 2nd amendment?

Question

Is it the right to carry arms while in service to the state (caveat: my interpretation of "a well-regulated militia". Yours may differ) or the right of the individual (with no felony record, obviously) to own and carry firearms?

Alot of nicely argued answers so far

Answer 1

*** catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt

Quemadmoeum gladis nemeinum occidit, occidentis telum est

Answer 2

The amendment is written so that the "well-regulated militia" clause is a modifier that does not restrict the "right of the people". If "the people" only referred to those of a militia, then the assembly clause of the first amendment would be subject to the same sort of restrictions you seem to propose for the second.

I doubt if that is the case. It seems rather plain to me that the introductory phrase of the second is a statement saying, in effect, that there is a need for a well-regulated militia. The second, and main clause of the amendment, clearly states that the people's (meaning just what it says) right to bear arms shall not be infringed.

Answer 3

You have to look at the original ideas behind this right. It was the consideration of the people who wrote it that since all able-bodied men were considered the states' militias, they were given the right to own firearms.

If you look at the state Constitutions, they say it much better, such as Michigans', which declares the right to bear arms for the defense of self and state. It's pretty clear that it is an individual right, as are ALL the rights in the Bill of Rights.

Answer 4

The second amendment does specifically say that "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." This means that individuals have the right to posses firearms for personal protection in this country. In a fairly free society, like the United States, the government and police force cannot protect you at all times as it could in a police state. Since the government and police force cannot guarentee personal protection, individuals have the right to protect themselves. While limits should be placed on who should be allowed to buy firearms (clearly those who are mentally unstable or have a history of violent crime should not posses weapons), any law abiding citizen of this country should be able to purchase, own, and use firearms.

Answer 5

"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."

Remembering in the 1700's we were just starting out with nothing more than the states militias to protect ourselves against invading forces. The "people" were the "country" and as such the people needed to have the right to bear arms.

We also needed those arms to obtain food to eat.

In my own opinion, though I cannot say I'm against the right to bear arms, I believe the 2nd Amendment has been a bit stretched beyond it's original intended purpose.

Best wishes.

Answer 6

The Second Amendment grants you no rights at all; it limits the government's authority to infringe on your rights. The Constitution isn't about granting rights to the people, it's about taking them away from the government; it's a restrictive document, not a permissive one.

Answer 7

the militia our Founders knew was composed of "every able bodied man", therefore, the 2nd Amendment would apply to every able bodied man and woman who could fire a weapon