The need to change the 2nd

[Rancher Will]

I would not vote to change the 2nd Amendment. It means just what it says and the reason that it says "a well regulated Militia is necessary to the security of a free state" is for a specific reason.

The framers of the Constitution knew, as we know still today, that the militia includes all able bodied persons who are qualified and available and able to defend our liberty. The second Amendment is in place to protect and defend all of the other Articles and Amendments.

The Second Amendment was included for no other reason.

 

[jtpur]

We all seem know what the Amendment means. Yes to the person who asked me the question if I knew only a court can invalidate the meaning of any article and yes, im well aware of what it takes to amend our Constitution.

Not to be contrary, but I fear too many of you who are unwilling to more accurately define our right to keep and bear arms are not hearing what the four justices said about our current right. Folks they are saying there is no individual right to keep and bear arms. One more vote and we could loose this right all together. I know what the current right is, You know what it is.....four justices obviously dont. all I would want to do is make it so clear, Ray Charles could see the meaning....this right has endured but only as early as 50 years ago a majority of Americans did not believe that it meant YOU and YOU could bear arms...this right is only as strong as our will to keep it. I just want to make it better.....

 

[halco46]

Second Amendment.

Just leave the 2A alone and Vote OUT the Supremes. Most are liberal political hacks anyway.

 

[mrerick]

Can't vote the supreme court justices out... Once the president nominates them and congress approves them, they are in their position for the rest of their life, or to the point they decide to retire.

The "Federalist Papers" Federalist Papers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia provide an interesting foundation and background on 2nd Amendment rights. You can get a complete copy of them online at:

The Federalist Papers - THOMAS (Library of Congress)

In them Hamilton, Madison and Jay wrote extensive essays about the meaning of the Constitution and amendments. Hamilton actually opposed writing a "Bill of Rights" because he didn't want to see universal rights granted by the constitution defined and enumerated. He feared that this would limit rights to just those mentioned, and open the door for interpretation (as is happening today).

The Supreme Court constantly refers back to the Federalist Papers to help interpret what the authors of the Constitution meant. Hamilton writes about the Militia in the 29th paper.

The Federalist Papers - THOMAS (Library of Congress)

In this discussion, he explores the importance of the militia to a a free people. Everything he says applies today.

We the people are also the militia. Interpreting the 2nd amendment out of existence will not change that.

Marc

 

[azalea]

I wish the originators of the 2nd Amendment could have seen the challenges being made (against it) in the present time (2012). If they had had any way of having such crystal ball foresight, I believe they would have omitted the "militia" reference.

As it was and is, the 2nd Amendment is enough to protect our rights ... provided that we continue to actively support and champion these rights.

Yep, a small part of me would like to see a cystal clear change to the 2nd (delete the reference to militia), but it's not going to happen. We (firearms enthusiasts) need to to focus our attention on enhancing our membership, viewpoints, and representation in DC.