Skip to main content
Message Font: Serif | Sans-Serif
 
No. of Recommendations: 18
In addition, the percentage of citizens who actually hunt or need a gun for other reasons has declined so much since the bill-of-rights was drafted.

The right to own guns was based on the need for the military to be armed when called up to fight--no other reason. The govt could not afford to buy/have large numbers of weapons for the military because where--and when--the need would arise was not a single place. It was a general need the govt could not fulfill quickly when they were needed.

This is not speculation. It is spelled out in the Militia Acts of 1792. The specified people (i.e. white property owners primarily) were *required* to spend their own money to buy *military grade* weapons and ammunition (i.e. so no using the family weapon handed down over the years). *Each person* was required to buy and have the specified equipment (a military sharing weapons doesn't really work very well). In exchange, those items were *specifically exempt* from seizure for any reason--including debts owed or taxes paid. Again, this makes sense, because you don't have a military if their weapons were seized and sold to pay debts/taxes. Thus, the purpose of the Second Amendment is (was) to enable those citizen who could be called to serve to be equipped with similar/compatible weapons and ammunition (etc) if they were called into military service.

This worked through the Civil War. Some time after that point, and before WWI, the govt began to equip the military by providing weapons, ammunition, clothing, and more. In essence, the need for the Second Amendment disappeared--because people were no longer required to bring their own weapon and ammunition (etc) when they were called up or volunteered for military service. This is also documented by the US govt *removing* the legal protection of a weapon, ammunition, etc from seizure and sale to pay debt or taxes. Before this change, the govt expected the person called into the military to provide their own weapon, ammunition, etc. When that change took place, the Second Amendment became a moot amendment because the need to have the person called into the military to bring his own weapon, ammunition, etc was eliminated. The govt *expected* the person to NOT have any of that gear because the military supplied it as part of the cost of govt.

Therefore, the Second Amendment is "dead amendment walking"--and the right knows it, as does the Supreme Court. Getting them to *admit* it is a totally different issue.
Print the post  

Announcements

When Life Gives You Lemons
We all have had hardships and made poor decisions. The important thing is how we respond and grow. Read the story of a Fool who started from nothing, and looks to gain everything.
Contact Us
Contact Customer Service and other Fool departments here.
What was Your Dumbest Investment?
Share it with us -- and learn from others' stories of flubs.
Work for Fools?
Winner of the Washingtonian great places to work, and Glassdoor #1 Company to Work For 2015! Have access to all of TMF's online and email products for FREE, and be paid for your contributions to TMF! Click the link and start your Fool career.