I don't recall ever seeing that. I have seen militia laws which provided
arms for the poor who could not afford them, or required masters/fathers to
provide arms to servants/sons.
Steve Halbrook
In a message dated 2/1/2011 1:34:28 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
vol...@law.ucla.edu
One of the questions surrounding the Second Amendment is, what exactly
is a well regulated militia? So, what did the phrase well regulated
mean at the time? The Oxford English Dictionary has a sample. Gibbon
used it twice.
FYI, not only was that term anciently used and understood by the
You can find related references at least back to Charles I, who sought an
Exact Militia. If militia is taken to mean all men capable of bearing arms,
then a militia is necessary to a free state is meaningless. Every state, free
or unfree, has one.
-Original Message-
From: Greg Jacobs
I think that we can safely assume that the framers would not commit 10% of the
Bill of Rights to a meaningless right. If that is the case then which of
your presuppositions is inaccurate?
Not every state has a militia. Merely having the physical strength to fire a
gun does not make one
On Wed, 2 Feb 2011 19:15:48 -0500
Henry E Schaffer h...@unity.ncsu.edu wrote:
My conclusion is that while militia means all able bodied adults
(at that time it only included men), adding the modifying well
regulated meant that the militia had to not only exist, it had to
function properly -
