Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

CJCRANE

(18,184 posts)

16. That's fair enough

Reply to NutmegYankee (Reply #15)

Mon Apr 23, 2012, 03:09 PM

Apr 2012

but I assume the use of a militia was for an outside threat from a large military force. This doesn't imply the use of arms for individuals to defend themselves against other individuals in the same community. Although of course if everyone is armed then that will be an obvious consequence.

Cannot edit, recommend, or reply in locked discussions

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

25 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The presence of "A well regulated militia" in the wording of the Second Amendment [View all] veganlush Apr 2012 OP

Seems a lot of people consider the NRA "a well regulated militia" these days. polichick Apr 2012 #1

KNR joeybee12 Apr 2012 #2

Whatever, elleng Apr 2012 #3

The 5 right wingers did. Hoyt Apr 2012 #20

What difference does that make? It still has the same legal force. badtoworse Apr 2012 #24

The reason for this is because the USA did not have a standing army and Jefferson never Lint Head Apr 2012 #4

Jefferson didn't write the constitution, but you're generally correct. TheWraith Apr 2012 #7

The Connecticut Constitution is also very clear. NutmegYankee Apr 2012 #17

Elbridge Gerry, for whom the gerrymander was named: KamaAina Apr 2012 #18

No, that's not what it means. TheWraith Apr 2012 #5

Good point. CJCRANE Apr 2012 #6

4th amendment - NutmegYankee Apr 2012 #9

"secure in their persons"... CJCRANE Apr 2012 #13

Militia in the 18th century was the people. NutmegYankee Apr 2012 #15

That's fair enough CJCRANE Apr 2012 #16

Congress can call the militia for three purposes. NutmegYankee Apr 2012 #19

I've learned something new today. CJCRANE Apr 2012 #23

Yes, it is an individual right. TheWraith Apr 2012 #10

In Heller, the SCOTUS said that the 2nd Amendment protects an individual right badtoworse Apr 2012 #12

The Second Amendment came from the Virginia Declaration of Rights (1776) NutmegYankee Apr 2012 #8

That's much clearer. Thanks. freshwest Apr 2012 #11

The reason the Second is less specific is that it is an amendment to another document. NutmegYankee Apr 2012 #14

I wish we did not have a standing army, but the world has not been working that way. freshwest Apr 2012 #22

Miller (1930s SCOTUS decision) basically says Congress can regulate non-military guns pretty freely Recursion Apr 2012 #21

this belongs in the gun forum. nt seabeyond Apr 2012 #25