Why doesn't the "well regulated militia" term in the 2nd Amendment allow governments to ban private ownership?

Question

There are many anti gun types who say this language in the 2nd amendment suggests that individuals don't have the right to keep and bear arms - only well regulated militias. It would seem some pro gun advocates believe this too - which is why they formed "militia" groups back during Clinton's era. They wanted to say they were "well organized."

As a person with a legal background I believe the answer is actually in the pre amble fo the Bill of Rights - rights granted to the people. What do you think?

Answer 1

You hit on a good point. Both pro and ati gun advocaes are guilty of focusing on the parts of the 2nd Ammendment that suits their purpose--and ignoring the rest.

But the wording is clear: regulation is permissible. But the Ammendment ALSO says " the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be abridged." There can be no question of banning gun ownership with that wording.

Although the various cases and opinions of the courts would fill volumes, they can be summarized in a single sentance: as long as a regulation (e.g. registration of firearms) does not prohibit--or have the effect of prohibiting--the keeping and bearing of arems by law-abiding citizens, the regulation is constitutional.

Answer 2

In the early days of the US, there was a big argument about keeping a regular army around. Thomas Jefferson didn't want a full-time army, fearing it could be used by unscrupulous leaders to stage a military coup. Madison and others favored the full-time military. So there was a lot of vigorous debate about the wording of the second amendment. The final draft was a compromise between the dueling factions. The Supremes pretty much ignored the militia part when they ruled on the 2nd amendment several years ago. Since the Supreme Court has the final say, current law favors private ownership.

Answer 3

Because of the placement of the comma in the original text.
A well regulated militia is supposed to be a group of citizens who provide for a local defense.
But the individual's right to arm themselves and protect themselves is covered prior to the comma.
You can't have militia's as outlined by the second amendment without the individual being armed.
I would also suggest learning about what the founders considered these terms to be and stop thinking about it in the way you want to see them.

Answer 4

Read the entire thing and you will see ..the 2nd adm ..is anti tyranny..by giving the citizen the right to be armed...then several citizens can ban together and start a Militia..just like the minute men..of early America they were everyday citizens..not soldiers..there have been survival groups back in the 70s...but they died out after the fall of Communism..

Answer 5

It would totally depend on what the meaning of militia really is. Personally, I think the founding fathers were referring to anyone capable of bearing arms in defense of the nation as a militia, meaning all able bodied men and women should have the right to possess firearms.

Answer 6

Because we the people of the "militias" would take things into our own hands. Crude, but, that right would be exercised to it's fullest and in quick order. Just a country boy.

Answer 7

When it comes down to it, the basic family is actually considered a well-organized militia. The common thought back then would have made it possible for families that lived near each other the ability to defend their "community"

Answer 8

At this point the United States Supreme Court has yet to address this aspect of the Second Amendment.

Shelly Parker et al v. District of Columbia, case No. 04-7041.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2006/12/07/scope_of_2nd_amendments_questioned/

It still amazes me when you get thumbs down for a statement of FACT.

Answer 9

Because the trend is to privatize the army, weapons must be far from people, it is dangerous to the system.

Answer 10

the US has 120,000 militia troops in Iraq now,, with companies like Halliburton or Blackwater,, and about 1,300 other private organizations,, they die everyday,, but are not counted as American casualties of Bush's war