Why should military small arms be banned for civilians?

Favorite Answer

Three articles (well two academic articles and a quotation) that every student, every politician and every media campaigner should read. And have explained to them if necessary.

Start with the quote;

http://thinkexist.com/quotation/the_beauty_of_the_second_amendment_is_that_it/146632.html

Jefferson made numerous references to the purpose and meaning of the Second Amendment, this one is very good in that it tends to roll several of them into one. For that reason there has been a campaign of late to prove that he never said that. Having made that statement, I can't find the site that called it bogus. They do have their work cut out for them as proving the null case is always impossible. Here are quotes on the subject from several people that show what the founding fathers intended.

http://cap-n-ball.com/fathers.htm

Next, take a look at what "well regulated" was taken to mean. It was insuring that this part of the law were upheld that caused certain national organizations to be founded.

http://yarchive.net/gun/politics/regulate.html


You have probably noticed that nowhere is there an implication that the law is in reference to sports or subsistence hunting. In the first draft of the Second Amendment, there was a prohibition against members of the militia being conscripted into military service. Only an all volunteer military was intended. But in the final form, that has been removed opening the way for the well regulated militia members to be conscripted. And that brings us to what exactly can a militia be if at first they wanted to prohibit it being part of the military? This last article covers it very well;

http://www.saf.org/lawreviews/fieldsandhardy.html

One of the most important concepts contained in this article takes us back to the Jefferson Quote, and restates it plainly.

"Just as militias are essentially local, so also are they essentially independent of established authorities, since the militia may have to challenge or bypass those authorities if they abuse their authority or fail to perform their lawful duties."


All the opportunistic politicians and media types have managed to do is to convince an awful lot of people that we have arrived at that point where the law is needed, where it may be time to challenge abusive authority....Show more

< The National Guard is NOT a milita, and beacuse it is a government entity.
The definition of a milita does not say it isn't a government entity. It is sometimes called an irregular army because they are not employed full time. Although the government had trouble raising the money, the militia during the revolutionary war did get paid.
< the greatest military on earth is struggling to fight against 20,000 remaining Taliban
They are not fighting the Taliban, they are fighting Al Qaeda, the number is less than 1,000, and they aren't even fighting anymore, they are training Afghani police and soldiers.
< That's pretty clear, the second amendment is so that civilians can protect themselves from tyranny.
Not even close. No country legalizes a way to overthrow the government by force. The reason for the militia is that George Washington and most of the founders did not want a standing military (army and Navy). They decided on a militia form of defense and created the post office as the method of calling up troops to DEFEND the country. This militia consisted of ALL able bodied white males between the ages of 18 and 45 and the Militia Act of 1792 specified how they would arm themselves. z...Show more

You are aware that police are civilians too, aren't you? Yet the have military weapons such as sub-machine guns, armored vehicles, drones (a drone in Houston crashed into what was described as a "police tank" during training.

A militia is all the men above the age of 17 who are in fit condition, it is specifically not ruled by any governmental body at any level BECAUSE the purpose of the militia is to take over when the government becomes oppressive.

To make that happen, our militia is supposed to be well regulated. That means they have access to weapons as god as or better than those the military and the police and other civilian organizations have, and know how to use them.

That is the basis of a free nation....Show more

The National Guard is what the founders would consider a militia. A militia back then, was organized and regulated by the community. It was never intended to be private armies.
You claim you need the weapons to fight tyranny, but how do you define it? Just because your candidates didn't win, and your political parties platforms are losing, is not tyranny.
Even the conservative Supreme Court ruled certain dangerous or unusual weapons can be banned....Show more

they should not be banned. why should law abbieding citizens of the same country not have the same arms as those protecting them. there is no reason except that our government has been comprimised and they are not going to stop untill the common person with a gun is considered uncommon. they want everyone to think that anyone with a gun is a crazy person just waiting to go on a rampage. and most people are dumb enough to belive it. that is the problem “Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.” there is another good quote from our forefathers that is better than i have every heard any of our presidents or congress ever say. we need to go back to the old way of thinking and try and fix the mess we are in although it might be to late...Show more