Well, it says, "A well-regulated Militia being necessary for the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."Gallstones wrote:The Amendment says .."shall not be infringed." You using a different dictionary from the rest of us?
Anyone who trusts their government to look out for the common people's best interests is a naive, fool and easy fodder for wolves.
There are two questions:
1. What is the extent of the people's right to keep and bear arms?
2. When does a regulation or rulemaking about arms become an infringement?
Not all regulations are an infringement. For example, under the First Amendment free speech clause, there can be reasonable time, place and manner restriction -- like - while free speech is protected, the state can prohibit people from driving trucks down the street with loudspeakers at midnight blaring messages, and they can prohibit collection agents from standing in front of your house with a sign saying "Gallstones is late on her payments" even if it's absolutely true. That is generally not considered an infringement on free speech. It's reasonable regulation.
Also, the right to keep and bear "arms" is limited to "arms." What is an arm? If we go by the "intent of the drafter" which is what some folks like to do, then it means muzzle loading smooth bore muskets. But, some people define it as any hand held projectile weapon -- would that include, though, rocket propelled grenades? Stinger missiles? Laser weapons? Radioactive tipped ammo? Exploding ammo? Armor piercing? Bazookas?
The point is, we have to define an "arm." I think there is room to limit the definition of an "arm" at some point, and to limit the kind and power of ammo. Also, we can do things like register -- enact product safety and design rules, etc. -- licensing - so long as those rules don't operate to infringe on the right to keep and bear arms. If you can keep and bear an arm, but you have to register the arm, has your right been violated? If yes, how so?
And, does the right to keep and bear arms mean that there can be no regulations on the sale/transfer of the arms? I can see lots of such regulations that would still allow people to keep and bear arms.
And, does the right to keep and bear arms mean "any" arm, or does the "well-regulated" bit mean that the government can prescribe the type, size and characteristics of the arms that the militia is to have?
I think the amendment is vague and poorly written. It is grammatically incorrect. And, there are more issues involved than just "arm=gun" and that means that I can own and carry any gun, anytime, anywhere, anyhow, with whatever ammo, in whatever quantities, and nobody can ever force me to register or license anything.
