Why do you believe your founding fathers allowed gun ownership?

Question

Is very confusing. I notice in your Constitution, does say well regulated militia, not average citizen, could bear arms. Was it for protection against invaders, as you had no standing army at the time? Was it to protect against intruders? Was it to rebel against your government if necessary? If so, how could you hope to defeat it now with only guns, even automatic weapons, when faced with tanks, aircraft etc.?

Answer 1

There is an excellent discussion of the origins and meaning of the second amendment here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

The constitution is interpretted and studied both by the legislature and the Supreme Court. Various laws related to the second amendment have been proposed by the legislature; and some have survived appeal in the Supreme Court.

While the court no longer recognizes membership in an actual militia as being necessary to gun ownership, it has upheld 'regulation' - meaning the use of background checks, limits on weapons type, and licensing rules for gun ownership. These are constitutional restrictions on gun ownership.

Answer 2

The right to own guns was written into our Constitution for several reasons. First, to keep the government in check. Face it, if the colonists had not had guns, England would still hold sovereignty over America. England did outlaw guns in Ireland, just to keep them from being able to rebel. There was also the Indian problems. We were still having to deal with various tribes at that time. I was for providing food for the table, as many people used hunting as a means of obtaining food. As to having to go against a government with tanks and automatic weapons now, you must realize that most of the soldiers would side with the people rather than the government. America is it's people, and their loyalty is to America, not to it's ruling government at the time. Also, if by chance we were ever invaded by another country, they would find America very difficult to contain with all of the firearms in the hands of the populace.

Answer 3

Actually, it says "the people" if you read it a little more carefully, just like it says in several other amendments. And the reason was basically all of the above. The colonies were dangerous places at that time, especially on the western frontier. Robberies were common, so self-defense was an issue. Gentlemen didn't travel anywhere unarmed.

And if you're wondering about the tactical thing, look how well the insurgents in Iraq are combating our troops with small arms and improvised devices.

Answer 4

Great question....
I think the Supreme Court has abused their privelages and interpretation of the Constitution for political gain for too long. It's shameful and goes far beyond the Second Ammendment. The 'Right to Bear Arms' was to allow the militia to keep guns in their homes and respond as minute men to fight the British. It was granted to the average citizen, because most served in their militias and the needed to protect their homes from invaders (British soldiers).
The thing we really need his very harsh penalties for criminals who commit crimes with a firearm.

Answer 5

My own personal understanding was that the right to keep and bear arms had more to do with ensuring the rights of people to protect their homes, land, and property.

Answer 6

tradition...the 2nd ammendment