OH MY GOSH. THIS SHIT AGAIN?
Okay, I’m bringing this back. Sorry to alla yall who’ve had to sit through this before. But for fuuuuuuuuuuuck’s saaaaaaaaaake people!
Where does the Second Amendment say “musket”? Show me where it says musket. In fact, show me where it even says GUNS. Show me where it puts ANY limits on what arms we can keep and bear. Show me the words.
You cannot; they are not there.
@proudliberal11 If what you posted is really what you believe - and I do honestly mean this in the nicest possible way - then you are not qualified to speak on the subject of the Second Amendment with any modicum of authority. You can have your own feelings and opinions, of course, but you clearly do not have the facts, and you do not understand the law, its adoption, the reasons behind it, or its intent. If you just want guns gone or want new laws, then simply petition the government to begin the process of repealing the Second Amendment and/or amending the Constitution (good luck with that, though), but please don’t try to change or erase history!
There is NO DEBATE on the meaning or intent of the Second Amendment. That was settled and made clear a long time ago, and it has nothing to do with what you think a “militia” is, for one thing, and nothing to do with “muskets” either, for that matter.
The Founding Fathers didn’t just shit out the Constitution and the Bill of Rights overnight or off the top of their heads. They didn’t forget about it until the night before it was due. These things were discussed and debated and researched and proven over the course of several months, and those discussions and debates were thoroughly documented. This drafting would have been equivalent to the 9/11 news coverage of the day! It was a BIG DEAL, even then; they knew they were building history. People were watching, recording, discussing everywhere. It’s ALL written down.
The Framers were extremely clear about exactly what they intended, solid evidence of which you can find by studying contemporary literature and documentation surrounding the authoring of the Second Amendment. Letters, speeches, publications, etc., written by and to the framers, as well as the public, - which clearly spell out the full intent of the law, explain the law in simple terms, and give insight into popular and official opinion about the law - are still freely available today. I’ve linked a handful, but it’s very easy to find this information, and I encourage - nay, beg - you to seek it out.
Here are just a few examples, though, in case you don’t feel like researching something so extremely important:
—–> “I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers.”
- George Mason, Address to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 4, 1788
“The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country.”
- James Madison, I Annals of Congress 434, June 8, 1789
“No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.”
- Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Constitution, Draft 1, 1776
“To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them.”
- Richard Henry Lee, Signer of the Declaration, A Framer of the Second Amendment in the First Congress
“What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms.”
- Thomas Jefferson, letter to James Madison, December 20, 1787
[On our military superiority over a tyrannical enemy] …This difference is ascribed to our superiority in taking aim when we fire; every soldier in our army having been intimate with his gun from his infancy.“
- Thomas Jefferson, letter to Giovanni Fabbroni, June 8, 1778
“To disarm the people…[i]s the most effectual way to enslave them.”
- George Mason, The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution, June 14, 1788
“Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every country in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops.”
- Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution, October 10, 1787
That could not be more clear. This “militia” is us. It’s you and me and everyone reading this and everyone else. THE MILITIA IS THE PEOPLE, THE CITIZENS, YOU AND ME.
If nothing else, please do take a look at THIS DOCUMENT. It lays out the history and the clear reasoning behind the Founding Fathers’ drafting of the Second Amendment. It is thoroughly sourced, and it is detailed.
As you can see, looking at what is here, juxtaposed with what we have in place today, we have already strayed extremely far from the original intent of the document as well as from the letter of its law - we have already infringed our God-given (and merely government-protected) inalienable rights to hell and back - and we the people are NOT happy to give away another inch, no matter how “mean” you feel icky-o guns may be.
And as for the document itself:
Let me break the Second Amendment down for you.
BUT FIRST! Before I get into that, you must understand that language is fluid and that it changes over the years, that the definitions of words change and adapt all the time. For example, the word “great” used to exclusively mean very large, the word “terrible” used to exclusively mean awe-inspiringly, the word “sick” used to exclusively mean ill, the word “woman” used to exclusively mean adult person born with a vagina, and so on. Therefore, you must look at the words and phrasing from the point of view of 1791, the time it was written, and you can’t apply our current use of language to it, and you must keep that in mind as you read older texts. And just because language changes, that does NOT mean the original intent of words changes, too. Quite the contrary.
“On every occasion [of Constitutional interpretation] let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying [to force] what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, [instead let us] conform to the probable one in which it was passed.”
- Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Johnson, 12 June 1823
Do not separate text from historical background. If you do, you will have perverted and subverted the Constitution, which can only end in a distorted, bastardized form of illegitimate government.
– James Madison, on the creation of the Constitution
So ok, sit tight, here we go.
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.
MEANS: hooked up; well outfitted; well provided for; has lots of all the latest and greatest things; well-armed
DOES NOT MEAN: heavily legislated; under intense governmental scrutiny; subject to lots of laws and ordinances
MEANS: the populace; a general, unofficial body of those citizens physically able to engage themselves in combat; those of us who have guns; a self organized and self managed group of people gathered for the purposes of defense
DOES NOT MEAN: official, government-sanctioned, -approved, and -run military installment that is slightly less formal than the Armed Forces; a junior or local sub-branch of the federal Armed Forces
MEANS: is the reason why; is required for; also, the wording here, and the preceding comma, replaces using “because this…” at the beginning of the sentence as we would use it today - it’s just rearranged
DOES NOT MEAN: if it becomes needed; only when needed; in times of threat but not otherwise
THE SECURITY OF A FREE STATE
MEANS: the defense of freedoms; the protection of rights and freedoms; maintaining sovereignty; protection from takeover (foreign or domestic)
DOES NOT MEAN: keeping us safe from any danger whatsoever; the protection of individuals from individuals
MEANS: full personal entitlement; the freedom; the free ability; the personal decision whether or not to; the God-given, free and clear, dependent only upon existing, choice
DOES NOT MEAN: sometimes, depending upon some people’s opinion, the ability to; the ability to, dependent upon whether or not one is allowed
MEANS: all legal inhabitants; all citizens of legal age of majority/responsibility
DOES NOT MEAN: some citizens, if they meet certain criteria; those citizens who have certain abilities or characteristics; only those citizens who qualify; citizens who meet certain restrictions or requirements; all citizens except those who do not meet certain qualifications
MEANS: to participate in any actions associated with; to possess and carry and use in any manner; to have; to acquire; to carry on their person or in their conveyance
DOES NOT MEAN: to simply have and carry; to own but have stored elsewhere; to be issued as and when, according to circumstances; to have a limited number of; to own but leave administration of to others; to have but with restrictions
MEANS: weapons or armament of any kind; offensive or defensive weapons; ordnance; guns, missiles, swords, knives, cannon, explosives; ammunition for weapons; any instrument intended for defense or offense against any person or thing; any item necessary to operate or maintain the above
DOES NOT MEAN: certain kinds of weapons; some but not all defensive implements
MEANS: must never, ever, under any circumstances, be, no matter what
DOES NOT MEAN: should not be; will hopefully not be; can only be under some conditions; can be, if legally restricted; is allowed to be if new laws are created
MEANS: taken away; restricted in any way; put conditions or requirements upon; diminished; changed or updated; made new laws about; limited in any way; re-legislated; detracted from; invalidated
DOES NOT MEAN: taken away, unless lots of people think it should be; changed, unless opinions change; updated, if people think that’s what they want
THEREFORE, were the second amendment written today, it would read:
Because a thoroughly hooked up and well-armed population is the only way our nation will ever be able to remain free and sovereign, and the only way we will ever keep our precious rights and liberties, every single citizen of this country is freely allowed to possess any firearm or weapon and to use said weapon in any way, and nobody is allowed to ever change, restrict, or limit laws about, or prevent any citizen from owning, keeping, or using any kind of firearm or weapon, even if people think that’s what they want.
Just to reiterate the parts that people most often misunderstand:
Well-regulated DOES NOT MEAN strictly governed. It means well outfitted, hooked the fuck up.
Militia DOES NOT MEAN official, state sanctioned, junior or local branch of the federal armed forces. It means citizens with guns, and that’s it. In fact, the Framers did not want a federal- (or state-) run standing military; they saw that as a threat to liberty. It’s very clear that what they meant was THE PEOPLE.
Keep and bear DOES NOT MEAN simply possess and carry. It means participate in any and all associated activities.
Arms DOES NOT MEAN guns, or certain guns, or guns with certain features. It means weapons, of any kind.
Just look these things up, please, or follow the links provided.
–> And COME ON. Use just a little common sense. If the Second Amendment were written exclusively to arm the military, or police, or officially government sanctioned militias, then WHY would it very explicitly say the right of THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms…? Why would these educated, intelligent, careful, and conscientious men make such a stupid contradiction in one of the most important documents they’d ever written? That’s simply ridiculous! They didn’t make any mistakes, and we haven’t been somehow blindly running the country wrong for 230 years. It’s written correctly, and the meaning of it is quite clear if you just read past the first few words.
The right of THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
That’s unmistakable. Really.
AND AS FOR THE ARMS THEMSELVES..
Nowhere does the Second Amendment (written in 1791) say anything about muskets, nor even guns, nor does it mention or even insinuate any limitation on what arms a person can keep and bear.
Even further, in case you somehow actually didn’t know this, there were basically fully automatic machine guns BEFORE the Second Amendment was written, and yes indeed, these were known and accounted for when the document was drafted.
Pepper-box revolver from 1790 or earlier
Puckle gun, invented in 1718 (complete with relevant text)
Belton flintlock rifle, 1777
Girandoni air rifle, 1779
(Thank you @guns-and-freedom for this list.)
And that’s only a few of the guns. I haven’t even mentioned all the other kinds of ARMS that were available before the Second Amendment was written, those ARMS upon which no restriction shall ever be put, according to the Constitution and Bill of Rights:
Mortars are projectile launching arms that have been in use since the 1400s.
By 1775, there were nine different Land Service and four Sea Service Mortars in the British inventory alone.
This French mortar formed part of the defenses of Louisbourg during the British siege of 1758. Made of cast iron, it could propel a 60-kilogram (132lb) shell up to four kilometers (2.5mi):
That’s just a few examples.
There are so many cannon, and their history is so rich and deep, that it’s impossible for me to get into it here. You know what a cannon is. Everybody does… so did the Founding Fathers.
Cannon were built for offense and for defense, for battle and for siege, for land and for sea. They can be mounted on ships, they can be wheeled on wagons or purpose built conveyances, and they can even (but not often) be hand held.
These things are old as dirt. Historians are pretty sure the first one was invented in China in the 1100s, and they became standardized and common in Europe as far back as the Middle Ages, though probably much earlier.
This incredible fort, built in 1593, was designed specifically to defend against cannon:
Speaking of cannon, let’s not forget the Howitzer, which also dates back to the 1400s and was used commonly as early as the 1600s. It’s somewhere between the weapon commonly referred to as “gun” and a cannon, as it has a shorter barrel, smaller propellant charge, and higher trajectory than the cannon.
This beautiful 24lb Howitzer entered service in 1790:
British and American Howitzers from the Revolutionary War, ca 1770s:
Bows, as you surely know, are single-operator, hand held projectile weapons which have been extremely common pretty much forever. They’re basically the bolt-action rifles of the last few thousand years.
The bow and arrow dates back to prehistoric times, and the crossbow dates back to 6th century BC in China. Modern, fancy bows are relatively complicated compared to historical bows, but the archers that wielded them were deadly accurate. Until (and even well after) the advent and widespread use of the firearm, bows and arrows - and archers - were absolutely formidable. They’re pretty much the closest thing we can compare in historical battle to the modern gun, in popularity, accuracy, and believe it or not, versatility.
Arrows can be loosed more than one at a time. Arrows can be made to explode on impact. Arrows can be loosed on fire. Arrowheads vary widely and have been purpose built for nearly unlimited uses for millennia.
Arrows can be loosed in rapid succession, quite accurately, and a good archer can loose arrows effectively semi-automatically** with just a modified grip.
A good archer can loose arrows nearly as fast as any semi-automatic** firearm, and just as accurately too.
(But this guy really has nothing on a trained, professional medieval or ancient military archer.)
Crossbows are extremely old, as well, and extremely commonplace throughout history. They’re basically the AR-15s of the last few thousand years.
The Chinese outpaced Europeans in this department, as they did in explosives (which I’m not even getting into here!), and had crossbow technology as early as the 6th century BC. That’s B.C. - where you count backwards. Europeans have been using them since at least the Battle of Hastings in 1066, and probably much earlier.
Crossbows are so fast, can be used so rapidly, and are so accurate and deadly that some armies wanted them outlawed because they were such a terrifying advantage on the field, and they were indeed banned from Christian-on-Christian battle by the Pope in 1096. But that didn’t last long.
Crossbow bolts vary nearly as widely as arrows, and can do many of the things arrowheads can do (such as cause explosions on impact, etc.), and they can be loosed extremely quickly and very accurately via a crossbow.
Here is a DaVinci giant crossbow, as in Leonardo DaVinci, 1488-1489:
And crossbows even come in semi-automatic**! Here is a hand held semi-automatic** crossbow that can shoot 10 bolts in 15 seconds. It is from the 4th century BC:
This bronze crossbow lower was mass produced as early as the 4th century BC:
—–> **BY THE WAY - semi-automatic means CAN ONLY FIRE ONE BULLET AT A TIME, one single bullet per pull of the trigger. It does NOT mean a Rambo-style, constant spray, belt fed, machine gun. That Rambo type of gun is NOT semi-automatic, as the news would love for you to believe; that is FULLY automatic. Anything that is FULLY AUTOMATIC - which means you can hold down the trigger and just spray - IS ILLEGAL ALREADY and has been for decades. FAR too many people have no clue what those words mean. <—–
Anyway. The above listed weapons are only the projectile ARMS that were readily available and widely known well before the Second Amendment was written. I’m not even going to get into melee weapons like swords, axes, hammers, polearms, pikes, maces, caltrops, spears, halberds…….. I’m just not going to start. Nor am I going to get into shit like war ships and armored vehicles and explosives and things like that. But those things are all arms as well. Every single weapon mentioned here - and any other type of weapon on earth - as well as any ammunition for any of those weapons, is an arm and is included in the Second Amendment’s use of the word arms.
ALL OF THE ABOVE ARE *A R M S* THAT WERE WIDELY AVAILABLE AND WELL KNOWN TO THE FOUNDING FATHERS.
And remember, the Second Amendment says arms, not guns, not muskets, not flintlocks, not anything specific at all. Just arms.
The Founding Fathers knew about all of these arms. They understood the evolution and history of warfare and weaponry. They were familiar with all of the weapons, including firearms, of their day. And I would confidently go out on a limb and say that - given how well they predicted the future of government growth, and the willingness of the people to buy politicians’ lines - they understood and expected firearms and weapons technology to advance in much the same way as it has (which is to say… it actually hasn’t really changed all that much). And speaking of the Founding Fathers’ foresight…
THE PURPOSE OF THE SECOND AMENDMENT IS, AND ALWAYS HAS BEEN, WAR!
One of the MAIN reasons for the Second Amendment existing is that the founding fathers didn’t trust the government OR the people. They NEVER intended for there to be a federally-run standing army; they wanted The People to always be ready and able to defend ourselves - from anyone, including especially our own government. They knew the government would eventually try to become corrupt, try to enlarge and empower itself, try to take more control than they laid it out to have, just as almost every other government has always done. And they could clearly see the people falling for the lines that government fed them in order to make them believe that giving it more power was a good thing, that taking away our power was a good thing, was what the people wanted, just as almost every other people has always done. They knew exactly what was coming, and they predicted it pretty much flawlessly.. because it always happens. That’s exactly why they wrote the Second Amendment to be perfectly solid. Thank God!
THE SECOND AMENDMENT WAS WRITTEN SPECIFICALLY TO EMPOWER PRIVATE CITIZENS TO GO TO WAR WITH THE GOVERNMENT OR WITH ANY OTHER ENEMY THAT MIGHT THREATEN OUR RIGHTS, OUR LIBERTIES, OR OUR SOVEREIGNTY.
Here is just one of the HUNDREDS of extant, and readily available, examples of discourse surrounding the Second Amendment and its drafting, communications from the general public and within the government:
The preeminent Whig historian, Thomas Macaulay, labelled this “the security without which every other is insufficient,” and a century earlier the great jurist, William Blackstone, regarded private arms as the means by which a people might vindicate their other rights if these were suppressed. [x]
The Second Amendment is the “emergency, break glass” for if/when the First Amendment stops working or, worse, is taken away.
It’s not for hunting, it’s not for home defense, it’s not for target practice or sport. It’s so that we can be as well-armed as (or, hopefully, be better armed than) any enemy we may need to fend off, including our own government. It’s there to at least make the government think twice about trying to take away our rights, to let them know that there is an armed populace out there, ready and wiling to defend its freedoms. It’s there to give us a fighting chance at keeping and maintaining the liberty that our forefathers fought and died for, and yes, it includes AK-47s. In fact, it also includes cannon and full auto machine guns and war ships as well, and includes anybody, no matter who, acquiring as many as they want (but we’ve let those rights be infringed anyway).
Your opinion on the meaning and intent of the Second Amendment is simply factually incorrect, and you yourself can easily verify that, if you’re ever so inclined to understand the truth rather than what feels right to you, by simply following some of the links above or searching for the recorded debates of the Founding Fathers. Hell, you can just search for a list of quotes by the Founding Fathers and gain a much more thorough understanding of their meaning. Please, do yourself the favor of taking a little time to learn about it. The sources are out there and very easy to find.
Again, THERE IS NO DEBATE ON THE MEANING OF THE SECOND AMENDMENT. THAT DEBATE HAPPENED - AND WAS SETTLED - OVER 200 YEARS AGO. AND THEM DUDES WHAT DEBATED IT WROTE DOWN EVERY SINGLE WORD OF THAT DEBATE, AND THOSE WORDS ARE STILL AVAILABLE TO US. THE MEANING OF THESE WORDS IS VERY CLEAR AND UNMISTAKABLE, AND IF YOU JUST FUCKING GOOGLE FOR A SECOND, YOU’LL SEE EXACTLY WHAT THE MEN WHO WROTE THEM MEANT BY THEM.
