A Break Down of the Second Amendment

"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."

Modern day gun grabbers believe that “well-regulated” means “subject to extensive government regulations” and regularly they tend to tell people: 

“You want people to listen to the last part of the Second Amendment where is says ‘shall not be infringed,’ but you want ignore the part where it says you have to be a ‘well-regulated militia.'”

But are they correct?

There are two key points within the second amendment that needs to be address and in order to properly reference them, we have to go back to the time of our founding fathers and understand why they used the phrasing that they did.

·         First, based on many source documents of 18th century America, there is vast evidence that this wording "well-regulated" actually meant, "property of something (or someone) was in proper working order" referring to something being "calibrated correctly".  Moreover, it was considered to mean; "equally functional in comparison".  But equally functional to whom?  Well that is explained in this next part. 

·         Secondly, from the Dictionary of British History (being that our founding fathers started off British), the intent of the militia was to; “repel any invasion, to secure order locally, and as a regional ‘constitutional force’ to balance royal control of the standing army.’”  So using various 18^th century source information, the American militia had one of two purposes:

a.  When in support of its own government, a militia was used to supplement and enhance the standing army, reinforcing them with self-armed civilians.  An example of this was the Virginia militia under George Washington and the Pennsylvania militia under Hugh Mercer, whose armed colonial civilians complimented the needs of General Forbes during the closing of the French and Indian War.

b.  When working against its own government, a militia was used to counter and repulse the standing army, thwarting them by any means until the people could properly organize.  We have two points of reference here with the minutemen of Lexington and Concord, who as civilians organized and trained themselves, electing their own leaders and defended Massachusetts.  Then we also have the independent companies of Fredericksburg and Culpeper who first elected their leaders and then they self-trained and supplied themselves before marching onto the capital in Virginia.

"... to balance control of the standing army"

So it is perfectly clear that the Second Amendment is more about non-governmental national defense, and not simply personal defense and if it was written out to modern day interpretation by our founding fathers, it would now say:

“As self-trained and well supplied armed civilians, equally functional to the standing army, are necessary to the security of this nation (from enemies without and within, to include our own government), it is the right of the people (as individuals) to keep and bear (affordable military) arms, and this natural right to self-defense (organized or as an individual) shall not be infringed by anyone, as per this Constitution.”

                                                                                      ~ Warbard