| Online: | |
| Visits: | |
| Stories: |
Second Amendment Game Changer?
http://andthinkingtheywerewise.blogspot.com/2016/02/a-well-regulated-militia-being.html
Excerpt:
“Well, that’s nice, but what did the founding fathers really have in mind with the Second Amendment? Let’s look at it again: 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. We think we know what these words mean today, but what was the common usage in 1789? To determine this I used Samuel Johnson’s 1792 edition of “A Dictionary of the English Language.” In those days a “militia” was defined as “the trainbands” or trained band of men. Specifically, a company of trained civilians, in England or America, from the 16th to the 18th century. “Regulate” was defined as “to adjust by rule or method” and “to direct”. “Arms” were defined as “weapons of offense” and “war in general”, so the Miller decision which restricted they type of weapons a person could own was incorrect as it was expected that citizens could own, provided they were not insane, any such weapon used in warfare. Now let’s look at the Second Amendment as the verbiage was understood by the men who wrote it: “A well directed band of civilians, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and carry weapons of offense used for war in general, shall not be infringed.”
I’ve updated the article to include additional clarification and commentary. I am also aware that the founding fathers knew what a militia was, but the term has become obfuscated as anti-gun constitutional challenges became prevalent.