Senate Blocked Gun Control Measures

Noxious,
First let me restate the the Constitution and Amendments are always open to interpretation and reinterpretation. Even if none of the words are changed or syntax altered.

I have read your post, more than once. There is nothing in the main body of the Constitution pertaining to individual arms that I can find, pro or con.

I assume you are using this part, which you highlighted, as proof that the founders wanted everyone to be armed so that they could overthrow their own government, if need be, by the use of arms. I see nothing that advocates or even hints at the need, absolute or otherwise, for violent overthrow. I see nothing about the need for individual citizens to be armed in order to accomplish the abolition of the said government.

This is taken, of course, from The Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution of the United States. They are two different documents. The Declaration of Independence was directed at Great Britain and it's government and the treatment of the 13 Colonies under that Government, it is not the document that establishes the laws of the United States. It has nothing to do with arms or militias.

Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution does provide:

The militia was to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions, I see no provision for overthrowing any government. In point of fact one charge of the militias was to suppress Insurrections. An Insurrection is:

So one reason for having militias was for the opposite reason you are stating, not to overthrow the government, but to put down insurrections.

I see no reference to any private, non governmental militia, nor any militia controlled, organized, armed, trained, disciplined or employed by anyone other than the government.


The first use of militias for the purpose of putting down an insurrection was during the Whiskey Rebellion of Western PA. President Washington raised from New Jersey, Maryland, Virginia, and eastern Pennsylvania a federalized militia force of 12,950 men to put down the rebellion. In addition the militia was used to put down resistance to the draft that was used to fill out the needed manpower of the militias.
The militia force entered Western PA in October 1794 under control of the Governor of Virginia and the rebellion collapsed. Militias were used to support not overthrow the government.

Article 2, Section 2 provides:

My bold. The President may call the State militias into Federal service, in which case he is their Commander in Chief.

So as the President can Federalize any State militia and as there is no provision for any private militias in the Constitution, where does the Constitution provide for the arming of citizens in a non governmental militia for the sole purpose of overthrowing the Federal government?

Please cite the Article and Section of the Constitution and quote the pertinent sentences.
I'll not bother with the Amendments until you show me the section of the Constitution, or the Declaration of Independence since you brought that up, that addresses civil militias.

 

LOL,
Okay, in order:

First off I didn't know that you needed a gun to be man.

Apparently they have to make up for a lack in another area.

 

So what is this supposed to mean? The U.S. Army is also made up of individuals, so what?

In this case they did not just show up to defend their area. They volunteered or were drafted to put down in insurrection in another area of their state or another state all together.

I have no idea what you mean here. But I didn't address the Bill of Rights in my last big post. I'm still waiting for responses to the main part of the Constitution.

 

Well, here is apart where I mentioned the 2nd Amendment. So here goes: This quote is from Virginia's version

My bold. Greatly influenced by George Mason.
Virginia rejected Jefferson's

Pennsylvania, however, included,

Notice the lack of the right to keep arms. Arms would not necessarily be allowed in individual homes, but stock piled in armories.
John Adams

In other words, militias are not to be used against any law or the government.

My bold.

 

Yes it is.

 

I never said that. I said conscription was used during the Whiskey Rebellion. But:

 

The argument was rasied that citizens need to be armed and militias need to exist so that the lawful government of the United States could be overthrown if need be, and that the Constitution and Bill of Rights recognized that need and parts were included to support that need.
No part of the Constitution or Bill of Rights ever included a provision that included the arming of citizens or the establishment of militias to overthrown the government.

I am drawing from several sources including Wikipedia, Military Law Review Spring, 1992, and archives.gov.