2nd amendment definition of "arms"

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Mark75H

    MD Wear&Carry Instructor
    Industry Partner
    MDS Supporter
    Sep 25, 2011
    17,173
    Outside the Gates
    If anything I would say we need more focus on the "well regulated" part if the 2nd. And I don't mean restrictions, I mean training. The average shooter is pretty dismal if I do say so myself.

    You always hear arguments about what a "militia" is, and how "militia" doesn't apply to the average person. Even though I don't think it should be necessary, but for the sake of argument why can't I join a militia and train? Americans should dominate every shooting sport.

    My biggest problem with the NRA is that it doesn't do enough to fulfil it's original purpose, which is to raise the marksmanship of the average shooter.

    https://mqp.nra.org

    http://pistol-competition.nra.org

    http://competitions.nra.org/how-to-get-started/conventional-pistol-competition.aspx

    what else should they be doing?
     

    Perfessor

    Newbie
    Mar 6, 2017
    60
    Anne Arundel
    hey guys i was wondering if we could start a debate on the legal definition of arms in the 2nd amendment. now if you look at the 2nd amendment, where it says "the right of the people to keep and bear ARMS" now my question is that the term "arms" is used in a very broad way. does the word "arms" include assault rifles and machine guns and class 3? ill let you be the judge.

    EDIT: sorry i had to go but ill elaborate on this subject. lets just say congress puts in an assault rifle ban. could one go to court and argue that the ban is unconstitutional because the 2nd amendment does not elaborate on what kinds of arms that are protected by the 2nd amendment? im only asking this because it brings up a very good argument.

    The Founding Fathers knew of semiautomatic rifles and wanted Americans to have them. The proof is that in 1777 Congress offered to fund the building of 100 such rifles for the Continental Army. That was *before* the Bill of Rights. We do not need to "be the judge" of anything; the history is already there in black & white.

    https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/967991624033746946.html?refreshed=yes

    (edit: added emphasis & quotes)
     

    Dammit_Man

    Member
    Jan 16, 2018
    70
    Are YOU satisfied with the skills of the average shooter? If you picked a random American gun owner would you want to depend on their marksmanship? I can't go to the range without expecting to get flagged.

    For starters Appleseed is pretty much doing the job that I'm talking about so I'd start there. The NRA should be the one doing that, that shouldn't be a void for Appleseed to fill. Then I'd move to expansion of 3 gun matches and wildcat matches, and I'd expand the availability of across the course matches and long range shooting, introducing further measures to make those sports more accessible. Those are the most interesting to watch and most likely to draw more people into the sport.

    I'd also hammer the fact that women can compete toe to toe with male shooters in matches. Shooting is one of the rare sports that doesn't need to be segregated by sex. That should be exploited to the fullest.

    I'd also put a focus on American competitiveness in Olympic shooting. Our showing in biathlon was pathetic, and it taps into national pride that can be intertwined into shooting sports.

    That's just off the top of my head. I'm not satisfied with the NRA's performance in those areas. My dad used to be part of a Montgomery county small bore club. Can you imagine that today? We've lost a lot of ground.
     
    Last edited:

    Occam

    Not Even ONE Indictment
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 24, 2018
    20,238
    Montgomery County
    If anything I would say we need more focus on the "well regulated" part if the 2nd.

    I know you're essentially joking, but don't even go down that road rhetorically. Because you're playing right into the central misunderstanding that most people have when talking about the Second Amendment. Everyone gets this wrong. Remember the context: the founders had just shaken off a regime that took away their individual weapons, and told them that the British Army was all the self defense the colonists would ever need. The founders weren't at all happy about the notion of having a standing military at any level, but recognized reality ... and the risk that it would represent, given what they'd just gone through.

    If we were to phrase the 2nd in modern, casual language, it might read: "Since it turns out we can't expect to maintain our nice new liberty-minded nation without having at least some sort of professional-grade standing military, it's important to establish that the existence of such a military cannot be used by anyone in government as an excuse to deprive the people of their individual right to keep and bear their own arms."

    THAT is what the phrasing of the second is all about.
     

    Jim12

    Let Freedom Ring
    MDS Supporter
    Jan 30, 2013
    33,861
    The Founding Fathers knew of semiautomatic rifles and wanted Americans to have them. The proof is that in 1777 Congress offered to fund the building of 100 such rifles for the Continental Army. That was *before* the Bill of Rights. We do not need to "be the judge" of anything; the history is already there in black & white.

    https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/967991624033746946.html?refreshed=yes

    (edit: added quotes)

    Interesting. https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Correspondence_between_John_Belton_and_the_Continental_Congress
     

    Mark75H

    MD Wear&Carry Instructor
    Industry Partner
    MDS Supporter
    Sep 25, 2011
    17,173
    Outside the Gates
    Pretty sure he meant "well regulated" in the 18th century sense of well trained, and not in the 20th-21st sense of "government controlled"
     

    Occam

    Not Even ONE Indictment
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 24, 2018
    20,238
    Montgomery County
    "Smooth running," or "well trained" makes NO difference. The Second Amendment isn't about establishing any such thing or requiring it or setting any such standard in relation to personally keeping and bearing arms. It's saying that since having a military turns out to be necessary, they're preemptively anticipating that someone with government power may try to use that an excuse to take away individuals' arms... and that no such infringement will be allowed.
     

    Dammit_Man

    Member
    Jan 16, 2018
    70
    Smooth running because it was well trained and practiced.

    Still thinking that's what he meant and not government controlled
    Correct. I don't know what else I could have done to make that more clear.

    I guess he saw "well regulated" and got a little trigger happy? Bum ba tissshh
     

    JohnnyE

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Jan 18, 2013
    9,462
    MoCo
    "Smooth running," or "well trained" makes NO difference. The Second Amendment isn't about establishing any such thing or requiring it or setting any such standard in relation to personally keeping and bearing arms. It's saying that since having a military turns out to be necessary, they're preemptively anticipating that someone with government power may try to use that an excuse to take away individuals' arms... and that no such infringement will be allowed.

    Smooth running because it was well trained and practiced.

    Still thinking that's what he meant and not government controlled

    Well trained vs. well running. That's a question of inputs vs. outputs. Well trained does not mean well running. Students may have good teachers but still fail the class vs. we we care about the end result, meaning no matter how they got there they know what they're doing. It this life RESULTS matter.
     

    Czechnologist

    Concerned Citizen
    Mar 9, 2016
    6,522
    yIOI10g.jpg
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,921
    Messages
    7,259,024
    Members
    33,349
    Latest member
    christian04

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom