Comment
Comment
re: #154 Nyet
The foolish assumption that giving “the people” the unrestricted access to arms will result in a well-regulated militia is, in fact, the core mistake of the 2nd amdt.
Actually, what results in a well regulated Militia is the actions of Congress - see the Militia Acts of 1792 for an understanding of just what the Founder’s intent was
In the aftermath of the English Civil War, the Founders did not want a standing army even though our revolution had proven the need for one; the utter failure of the militia as a military force during the revolution should have shown them better. It didn’t and the only times the milita would successfully be used was in the suppression of the Whiskey Rebellion and against some not very warlike Indian Tribes (Black Hawk’s War for ex) After that, the militias would fail militarily repeatedly nearly losing the War of 1812 and the Civil War for the US.
OTOH, looking the Mexican-American war fought mostly by the standing army in the service of the slave owners of Texas, were the Founders all that terribly wrong for wanting to avoid a standing army?
