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

jimmy the one

(2,776 posts)
27. Scalia knows more about guns than money minded hamilton
Wed Jan 16, 2013, 08:55 AM
Jan 2013

wiki: The term "regulated" means "disciplined" or "trained". In Heller, the U.S. Supreme Court {justice scalia} stated that "he adjective 'well-regulated' implies nothing more than the imposition of proper discipline and training."

In Federalist No. 29, Alexander Hamilton suggested that well-regulated refers not only to "organizing", "disciplining", and "training" the militia, but also to "arming" the militia


And of course justice scalia prevailed in his 2008 ruling, what did alexander hamilton know, eh?

Read what Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story wrote in early 1800s':

"The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers, and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.
And yet, though this truth would seem so clear, and the importance of a well regulated militia would seem so undeniable, it cannot be disguised, that among the American people there is a growing indifference to any system of militia discipline, and a strong disposition, from a sense of its burdens, to be rid of all regulations.
How it is practicable to keep the people duly armed without some organization, it is difficult to see. There is certainly no small danger, that indifference may lead to disgust, and disgust to contempt, and thus gradually undermine all the protection intended by this clause of our National Bill of Rights."


When Justice Story observed in his final sentence - that militia indifference might gradually undermine all the protection intended by the 2ndA - he could not possibly have been referring to an individual RKBA disconnected from militia, since it was a militia disconnect which was his concern about undermining the 2ndA.

Also note story's use of 'the people', clearly white males aged 17 - 45 eligible for militia, not 'all' the people as argued by rightwing. And of course the 'organization' story refers to is the militia.

(believe it or not, scalia twisted story's quote above, to support for the individual interpretation)


PS: Thanks, Ohio!

Recommendations

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

right there with the part that says america is a christian nation. rurallib Jan 2013 #1
Why would it need to? n/t discntnt_irny_srcsm Jan 2013 #2
Are you planning on... krispos42 Jan 2013 #3
does the admin agree with your definition of Spam? Tuesday Afternoon Jan 2013 #6
Dunno. I didn't ask and they didn't tell. n/t krispos42 Jan 2013 #7
well, there is something about spam in the ToS, I think. Tuesday Afternoon Jan 2013 #22
"Free state" nt my boy x dog Jan 2013 #4
Free Staters are nut jobs jpak Jan 2013 #20
you say "new Gun Nut line" chicoguy Jan 2013 #5
And another insightful and well thought out post by the anti gun zealots rl6214 Jan 2013 #8
"well regulated militia" - regulated by the government. guardian Jan 2013 #9
Just who exactly do you think was doing the regulating?? jmg257 Jan 2013 #10
irrelevant guardian Jan 2013 #11
Irrelevant?! The Constitution is hardly "irrelevant"...and has many more words... jmg257 Jan 2013 #12
What do people subscribing to your beliefs make of, say, the Regulators of North Carolina? Democracyinkind Jan 2013 #16
Well run, efficient, smooth operating? That's how the Regulators would define it. hack89 Jan 2013 #17
The Regulators of North Carolina were not in favor of new rules and regulations? Democracyinkind Jan 2013 #23
No - their issue was the corrupt enforcement of those rules hack89 Jan 2013 #24
... one guided by rules? Democracyinkind Jan 2013 #28
Regulate refers to the desired end state hack89 Jan 2013 #29
The entire Constitution ... holdencaufield Jan 2013 #13
being necessary to the security of a free State obviously has nothing to do with govt. tyranny bubbayugga Jan 2013 #14
1828 definition of well regulated (takeII) jimmy the one Jan 2013 #15
Nice post safeinOhio Jan 2013 #18
It also meant well trained and equipped. hack89 Jan 2013 #25
You need to post this over at AR15.com ileus Jan 2013 #19
Bran! Remmah2 Jan 2013 #21
From wiki tama Jan 2013 #26
Scalia knows more about guns than money minded hamilton jimmy the one Jan 2013 #27
Very well tama Jan 2013 #30
It doesn't. Neither does the first amendment. Next question. AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #31
The Second Amendment was created to control slaves, their escape and their uprisings. TxVietVet Jan 2013 #32
according to a Handgun Control Incorporated board member gejohnston Jan 2013 #34
Its right there in the authorization clause. N/T beevul Jan 2013 #33
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control & RKBA»So where in the Holy Seco...»Reply #27