Where does the "Right to Bear Arms" end?

Question

What I cannot comprehend is how it is that the very same people who believe our government, in the interest of protecting us from potential "terrorists", should have the right to spy on, detain without trial, investigate, interrogate, and curtail the free speech and movement of legal residents that have not been accused of a crime, believe so strongly in the inalienable right of the average person to retain weapons of mass destruction in their homes and carry around concealed weapons designed to kill other human beings. The Second Amendment speaks of a well-regulated militia- i.e. a National Guard-type volunteer militia- and could be interpreted to allow possession of a weapon for self-protection- it says nothing about the scores of heavily armed right-wing cults and anti-establishment militias that operate very similarly to the groups we brand "terrorists" overseas. Does this "right"- as with free speech and privacy- only apply to Christian fundamentalists that share their views?

Update:

Heck, I'm probably on a "watch list" now- my phone could be bugged, and I could be subject to indefinate detention and interrogation next time I board an airplane- just for writing the question. Yet the same people (Bush/Republicans) who have repeatedly pushed for the suspension of basic Constitutional protections- i.e. the Patriot Act- believe I should be able to tuck a submachine gun under the seat of my car.

Yun · Accepted Answer

You sound like you're taking the reasoning from the defense lawyer of DC.
The problem is that the Supreme Court (liberal and conservative members alike) has already made it clear that such an interpretation of the Amendment is wrong.
While they haven't made a decision yet, its fairly plain from their statements that they agree with the idea that has been consistent from the founding of this nation that the people as a whole have a right to bear arms.

As far as "Christian fundamentalists" go, you should note the number of Democratic politicians that want the ban in DC gone as well.
Perhaps you should start looking around at the others that disagree with you too. There are a lot more than you think.

thebigshowernie · Answer

I think that the 2nd amendment does apply to the individual for this reason. Militias were made up of all the white men in a city or state during the time the Constitution was written. The writers of the Constitution were weary about the Government becoming too powerful and they gave people the right to bear arms as a means of protection against an opressive government. When the British ruled the Colonies they had all the arms secured and it was very difficult for the Revolutionaries to secure arms in their fight against the British. Giving the people the right to bear arms protects them from an oppressive government. However, I don't think that the founders had in mind the type of weapons that we have now. Assult weapons should be banned for public sale. I also think that there should be some control from the government as to who can purchase a gun. The laws that are on the books now are not enforced to the fullest extent and it is far too easy for people to get guns at auctions or online. I think that the technology of weaponry has changed so much in the last 200+ years that perhaps the law should be altered to fit the times.

binder · Answer

Libby - Elizabeth Emy - Emersyn/Emerson Emmy/Milly - Emily/Emma/Emmeline Milly/Cami - Camilla/Camille Cami - Campbell/Cambell/Cameryn/Cameron Harlie - Harlow Charlie - Charlotte/Charlize/Charlene Carly - Caralyn Effie - no longer certain Ellie - Elizabeth/Elaina Bri - Aubrie Evie - Evelyn Lily - Lillian Katie - Katherine/Kaitlyn/Katrina/Katalina Annie - Anneliese/Anne/Annabel/Anastasia/Annette... Stazi - Anastasia Jessi - Jessica Lanie/Mellie - Melanie

Grayfox · Answer

i don't know but my guess is that anyone attacking me would consider life a bit differently if they knew i carried a fire arm... if you make it illegal to carry one only the bad guys will have them...  making it illegal [nationally or world wide] is not a deterent because they have already stepped over the line by robbing or terrorizing so getting a fire arm illegally is no problem... i'd feel a lot safer if more good people carried firearms.

as far as what other people are doing in the world personally i think we should just let them do what they want while we maintain strong defensive force in our own land...  unfortunately this cannot be done because everyone thinks that other people's business is 'my' business. and we have already stepped in and muddled affairs.

Ron N · Answer

The Right to Bear Arms ends in this Americans hands when
he places 30/30 winchester in a saddle sling and Holtsters
a side weapon.. It's my right,. It's my choice,

Steven · Answer

You should consider reading The Patriots Act that shows you the governments so called "reasoning."

Trollbuster · Answer

Who in the hell are you to tell me--a law abiding citizen--that I can't own firearms ?

Huh?

Anonymous · Answer

its getting better too...our big court is going to rule liberals cant take them away...heh heh

David · Answer

Dude, your rant is showing...

Trending News

Where does the "Right to Bear Arms" end?

9 Answers