“Well regulated” in the 1700s sense or “well regulated” in the “I think the government should have direct control over the militia that is supposed to violently fight the government” sense? Because imo one seems more viable than the other.
The second amendment was never intended to let the people overthrow the government. It was intended to serve instead of a standing army for the defense of the republic. Madison didn’t want military power centralized in the Federal government.
Ehhh the federalist papers make it pretty clear that the second amendment and the aforementioned militias were for threats both foreign and domestic. Plus, considering the whole “starting a revolution against what was at the time ‘their own’ country” thing alone I think they recognized the possibility that they may need to do it again in the future.
“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants” and all that.
Not only did he not want it centralized, it was really uncommon and expensive to have a standing professional army at the time. The US was a new nation, and it was pretty poor. The idea they’d be able to have a federal professional military, at least one large enough that you don’t need supplemental militias, would probably be laughed at.
Heretic!
If those gun toting hicks could read. They’d be very upset.
It’s almost as if some form of militia, possibly a well regulated one, would also be necessary.
“Well regulated” in the 1700s sense or “well regulated” in the “I think the government should have direct control over the militia that is supposed to violently fight the government” sense? Because imo one seems more viable than the other.
The second amendment was never intended to let the people overthrow the government. It was intended to serve instead of a standing army for the defense of the republic. Madison didn’t want military power centralized in the Federal government.
Ehhh the federalist papers make it pretty clear that the second amendment and the aforementioned militias were for threats both foreign and domestic. Plus, considering the whole “starting a revolution against what was at the time ‘their own’ country” thing alone I think they recognized the possibility that they may need to do it again in the future.
“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants” and all that.
-Thomas Jefferson
Not only did he not want it centralized, it was really uncommon and expensive to have a standing professional army at the time. The US was a new nation, and it was pretty poor. The idea they’d be able to have a federal professional military, at least one large enough that you don’t need supplemental militias, would probably be laughed at.