Constitutional?

Unrelated Discussion
1

this is a question/ rant i posted on another forum, but I would also like your opinions… so here it is

“A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”

Lately I have been on a mission to understand why a state law gets to make a list of weapons that i cant carry, aside from nuclear war heads, or bio hazardous weapons or any other WMD, it shouldnt be a big deal right?

Local state laws say I can only carry a single edge blade under three inches, but the second amendment (the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed) red flags to me that a state law cannot constitutionally limit me from carrying a blade of my choice ( notice the amendment does not say keep and bear ‘’ certain’’ arms)

I would like to negate the " this amendment is for organized militia, or military" argument by the quote “the right of the people to keep…” not the right of the militia, (this also leads me to believe that the word “militia” here is a term regarding everyday citizens.

frankly I am on this mission simply because I want* to carry a larger knife with me every day, virtually wherever i go (something like the shanghai shadow - which violates the three inch limit, the single blade limit, and is a fixed blade)

*and I feel the constitution gives me the right to, and my local laws are violating my constitutional rights

I realize most of you out there arent lawyers or judges or what not, but what are your thoughts?

Please accept my apologies if this is the wrong discussion to have here, but I feel this is very important to me

2

Unfortunately people have changed drastically in the last two hundred years or so… And you can’t exactly trust American citizen Joe Blow with a knife, or a sword, or an automatic rifle. Unfortunately as well, its very hard to have special regulations for people on an individual basis, and its near impossible to separate the crazy wanna be human butchers from your average knife/gun/sword/flaming chainsaw enthusiast, so the next best thing to do it just have across the board regulations…

That’s just my guess…

3

maybe you cant trust every who is armed… but the way i see it, thats more reasons to arm myself and to be able to defend myself (and those who arent able)

4

^^^Yes, but you wouldn’t have to defend yourself if other people didn’t have unrestricted access to weapons. I’m going to have to agree with Mitch. People can’t be trusted, and until they can, the government has to regulate everyone’s use and possession of guns and knives. Letting any random citizen go and buy a military grade weapon to carry around is not a safe policy, because as Mitch said, it is hard to determine in what way that person intends to use the weapon. While you have a compelling argument, it makes for an all-around safer society if “the right to bear arms” is monitored to a certain extent.

5

Just get over it and move on.

6

Funny thing. In my state for 100$ and that is all, you can get a liscense for a concealed weapons permit. Just shows the government wants money, not our safety

7

True, but not true… You probably live in a rather conservative state, and they are probably fond of keeping things constitutional… That’s the great thing about the US. We are united states… Things vary from state to state… States rights and what not…

And is it really just 100 bones and you can keep a gun in your coat? Or do you have to undergo safety classes and what not?

8

Huh ???

9

I am not going to say who but I know someone who got one with no classes needed. I am pretty sure they robably do a backgroun check for phelonys etc. or I would at least hope so.

10

I was testing the app and you know autocorrect…

11

“An armed society is a polite society.”

12

“If you outlaw yoyos only outlaws will have yoyos.”
Fact: The yoyo was invented as a weapon.

13

B.S. :wink:

2 Likes
14

How dare you! Mountain Dew never lies

15

Mythbusters did it.

16

In Feudal England, laws had to be passed to ban the use of sharpened knives for eating at the table. This was the result of many a drunken brawl that ended in tragic death. We still use butter knives today.

While the constitution allows the bearing of arms, there are prohibitions that have historically been allowed. The key point in the constitution is “well regulated militia”. You, an individual, are not a well regulated anything. No one has authority over you and the only check against your actions are your own. Therefore you, an individual, may be prohibited from bearing arms if it is deemed to be in the interests of public safety or other such interests of society; since you do not fall under the definition of a well regulated militia.

In the old west, individual citizens were prohibited from bearing guns inside the many city limits. This was constitutional because it was for overall public safety and applied to everyone equally. Well regulated militias, like the sheriff and his deputies, are not prohibited. Individuals with concealed weapons permits, are not prohibited (from carrying guns) since they are, by definition, well-regulated.

Your local laws probably have deemed it a threat to public safety to have individuals walking about with large knives. In such a circumstance, citizens with knives can threaten and intimidate those without knives. In such a circumstance, the result will be everyone carrying knives and arguments over petty issues leading to death.

I would rather that you did not carry deadly weapons. …Personally.

4 Likes
17

Good example. In Alaska, if you carry around a gun, you’re going to be looked at and then asked “What make/model is that?” or “Is that the type that’s a shotgun as well?”
If I do that anywhere else, people are going to assume I’m about to open a can of whoopass and stay away/run away from me.

This is modern day. However, when I listened to JFK’s inaugural speech, I heard some rather pro-gun words in there. And that was from a Democrat!
It all depends on what the situation in the world is. Back then, everyone peed their pants when they heard “Russia,” so guns were most accepted as a sense of security from ‘those darned Reds.’

Nowadays, people have taken this whole negative assumption on firearms. What they get from CNN/MSNBC/Fox is that most crimes have been committed with guns(and that only bad guys use guns). Yes, that’s true. BUT, good people have them too. It’s not the shooter, it’s the shoot-ee. Guns don’t kill people, they are merely puppets who obey their master’s commands.

My father had an interesting idea:
“Security at airports should just issue out guns to everyone. If there’s a bad person or terrorist afoot, what are they gonna do when everyone is aiming at them?”

1 Like
18

Come to Mississippi, you will find you are sorely mistaken.

19

I also forgot to mention Georgia

20

Constitutional? Sure, let’s go for a walk. :smiley: