Presently, and in this day and age it should come as no surprise that a majority of Americans interpret the words "Well-Regulated" to mean controlled by laws or subject to legislation. It is not true. "Well Regulated" when defined in the context of English usage in the Eighteenth Century surely meant;(in this instance), current, modern, well-stocked or supplied. If, for sake of an example, you had a watch that could not keep proper time, you took it to a watchmaker and he would adjust its regulator. The timepiece would then be useful again, its efficiency restored, as well as its ability to stay current. A "Well Regulated Militia" was not intended to be restricted by denial of arms nor was the peoples right to them meant to be infringed. Regulation meant that able-bodied free persons had an inventory of arms and supplies necessary for the security of a free state and was therefore reliable. Funny thing is that not one scholar of American Literature has stepped up to define this type of language as appears in the Bill of Rights. Anti-gunners would call this definition propaganda or "spin". It is not.
The term "Well Regulated" defined
- Thread starter tuc22
- Start date
I agree completely.
And IF we even do go with the modern, popular interpretation of "well regulated" (which I don't, but I'll follow this line just to complete the demolishing of the anti-RKBA argument), the anti's still lose. The regulations being called for are mostly not "well". Banning guns based on cosmetics, requiring dangerous trigger locks, irrational gun-free zones, etc. are really very poor regulations, all made by people who don't like guns rather than by people who understand the topic well and are addressing serious issues. If they want neo-"well regulated", they should follow the Swiss and Israeli models of regulation, where the right to keep and bear arms is largely intact, the gov't knows who's got what and requires training on quality weapons...and nearly everyone either has or may have pretty much what they want and take it where they want, as long as the gun is not "defective" (i.e. functions reliably).
If they're honest, the anti's don't want "well regulated" either way. But since they're ignorant and dishonest, they just use the mis-definition of the phrase as a red herring.
And IF we even do go with the modern, popular interpretation of "well regulated" (which I don't, but I'll follow this line just to complete the demolishing of the anti-RKBA argument), the anti's still lose. The regulations being called for are mostly not "well". Banning guns based on cosmetics, requiring dangerous trigger locks, irrational gun-free zones, etc. are really very poor regulations, all made by people who don't like guns rather than by people who understand the topic well and are addressing serious issues. If they want neo-"well regulated", they should follow the Swiss and Israeli models of regulation, where the right to keep and bear arms is largely intact, the gov't knows who's got what and requires training on quality weapons...and nearly everyone either has or may have pretty much what they want and take it where they want, as long as the gun is not "defective" (i.e. functions reliably).
If they're honest, the anti's don't want "well regulated" either way. But since they're ignorant and dishonest, they just use the mis-definition of the phrase as a red herring.
The watch regulator comparison kinda bothers me cause the other name for the regulator on an engine is the "governor"
The name for the governor system is the government
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>[Schulman:] "(5) Which of the following does the phrase 'well-regulated militia' mean: 'well-equipped', 'well-organized,' 'well-drilled,' 'well-educated,' or 'subject to regulations of a
superior authority'?"
[Copperud:] "(5) The phrase means 'subject to regulations of a superior authority;' this accords with the desire of the writers for civilian control over the military."
[Schulman:] "(6) (If at all possible, I would ask you to take account the changed meanings of words, or usage, since that sentence was written 200 years ago, but not take into
account historical interpretations of the intents of the authors, unless those issues can be clearly separated."
[Copperud:] "To the best of my knowledge, there has been no change in the meaning of words or in usage that would affect the meaning of the amendment. If it were written
today, it might be put: "Since a well-regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be abridged.' [/quote]
http://www.largo.org/literary.html
dZ
The name for the governor system is the government
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>[Schulman:] "(5) Which of the following does the phrase 'well-regulated militia' mean: 'well-equipped', 'well-organized,' 'well-drilled,' 'well-educated,' or 'subject to regulations of a
superior authority'?"
[Copperud:] "(5) The phrase means 'subject to regulations of a superior authority;' this accords with the desire of the writers for civilian control over the military."
[Schulman:] "(6) (If at all possible, I would ask you to take account the changed meanings of words, or usage, since that sentence was written 200 years ago, but not take into
account historical interpretations of the intents of the authors, unless those issues can be clearly separated."
[Copperud:] "To the best of my knowledge, there has been no change in the meaning of words or in usage that would affect the meaning of the amendment. If it were written
today, it might be put: "Since a well-regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be abridged.' [/quote]
http://www.largo.org/literary.html
dZ
Jeff Thomas
New member
This was my one disappointment with 'That Every Man Be Armed', by Stephen Halbrook. Kept looking for his explanation of 'well regulated', but never did find it. Maybe I missed it, but I don't think so.
Paul Revere
New member
tuc22...
Your quote:
"Regulation meant that able-bodied free persons had an inventory of arms and supplies necessary for the security of a free state and was therefore reliable."
Enough said!
Your quote:
"Regulation meant that able-bodied free persons had an inventory of arms and supplies necessary for the security of a free state and was therefore reliable."
Enough said!
VictorLouis
New member
My understanding of the term would be: well-drilled, or practiced. Much like close-order drill, as practiced in today's military. In other words, practiced, ready, and ABLE to martial for the common defense if required.
The Oxford English Dictionary (OED) is probably the most useful reference for seeing how meanings change over time. Mine's at home, but I found this by searching for well regulated. BTW, www.google.com seems to be one of the better search tools.
------------------
Protect your Right to Keep and Bear Arms!
------------------
Protect your Right to Keep and Bear Arms!
OK, I dragged out the OED and confirmed the citations:
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>1709: "If a liberal Education has formed in us well-regulated Appetites and worthy Inclinations."
1714: "The practice of all well-regulated courts of justice in the world."
1812: "The equation of time ... is the adjustment of the difference of time as shown by a well-regulated clock and a true sun dial."
1848: "A remissness for which I am sure every well-regulated person will blame the Mayor."
1862: "It appeared to her well-regulated mind, like a clandestine proceeding."
1894: "The newspaper, a never wanting adjunct to every well-regulated American embryo city."[/quote]I also checked the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, Second Edition. It lists, but doesn't define, the term well-regulated. It defines regulate thusly:
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>regulate 1. to control or direct by a rule, principle, method, etc.: to regulate household expenses. 2. to adjust to some standard or requirement, as amount, degree, etc.: to regulate the temperature.
3. to adjust so as to ensure accuracy of operation: to regulate a watch. 4. to put in good order: to regulate the digestion. -- Syn 1. rule, govern, manage, order, adjust, arrange, dispose, conduct. 2. set 4. systematize.[/quote]
------------------
Protect your Right to Keep and Bear Arms!
[This message has been edited by Gorthaur (edited April 13, 2000).]
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>1709: "If a liberal Education has formed in us well-regulated Appetites and worthy Inclinations."
1714: "The practice of all well-regulated courts of justice in the world."
1812: "The equation of time ... is the adjustment of the difference of time as shown by a well-regulated clock and a true sun dial."
1848: "A remissness for which I am sure every well-regulated person will blame the Mayor."
1862: "It appeared to her well-regulated mind, like a clandestine proceeding."
1894: "The newspaper, a never wanting adjunct to every well-regulated American embryo city."[/quote]I also checked the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, Second Edition. It lists, but doesn't define, the term well-regulated. It defines regulate thusly:
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>regulate 1. to control or direct by a rule, principle, method, etc.: to regulate household expenses. 2. to adjust to some standard or requirement, as amount, degree, etc.: to regulate the temperature.
3. to adjust so as to ensure accuracy of operation: to regulate a watch. 4. to put in good order: to regulate the digestion. -- Syn 1. rule, govern, manage, order, adjust, arrange, dispose, conduct. 2. set 4. systematize.[/quote]
------------------
Protect your Right to Keep and Bear Arms!
[This message has been edited by Gorthaur (edited April 13, 2000).]
I think I'd better bump this to the top. Well-regulated does not now mean, nor has it ever meant, legislated to death. It simply means in good order, systematic, non-chaotic, etc.
------------------
Protect your Right to Keep and Bear Arms!
------------------
Protect your Right to Keep and Bear Arms!
Dark Avenger
New member
I think that you may be getting yourself worked up over nothing.
The first section decalares that there is a need for a "well regulate milita".
The second part, recognizing the need for the "well-regulated militia" prevents laws from being passed which would deny the equipment necessary to form such a milita.
Whether or not you are part of the milita, the right is not to be infringed lest it prevent the formation of said milita.
Get it ? (I guess that is a dumb question from one TFLer to another!)
The first section decalares that there is a need for a "well regulate milita".
The second part, recognizing the need for the "well-regulated militia" prevents laws from being passed which would deny the equipment necessary to form such a milita.
Whether or not you are part of the milita, the right is not to be infringed lest it prevent the formation of said milita.
Get it ? (I guess that is a dumb question from one TFLer to another!)
I think the terminology shift has had a distinct, and damaging effect upon many parts of our society.
It's also accounted for some good, and funny expressions..
Some of the following are how the revisionsts would have us re-interpret the 2nd Amendment.
During the 60's-70's a cigarette was called a fag, right? No further explanation necessary, so I won't offend some others out there.
Everybody remembers the TV Sitcom, "Leave it to Beaver"? I'm sure you've all heard the twist on that then. Where June Cleaver asked Ward, "You were a little hard on the Beaver last night, weren't you Ward"? Today that remark has a distinct meaning FAR from the original comment.
Take a coffin nail for instance. 150 years ago a coffin nail was just that, not a cigarette, right?
Moving right along. Anybody here ever heard the phrase, "Gay Paris"? Gay used to mean happy, and light-hearted. Now, of course, it represents a distinct sexually oriented crowd of the world.
And it's this conversion of meanings that occur through the generations that have the impact we're dealing with. Coupled with the innate desire of some to also convert this country to something else besides a Republic.
The following link might shed some light on this Democratic Society we've heard our electeds in WDC speak of
http://www.worldsocialism.org/main.htm
Best Regards,
Don
------------------
The most foolish mistake we could make would be to allow the subjected people to carry arms; history shows that all conquerers who have allowed their subjected people to carry arms have prepared their own fall.
Adolf Hitler
It's also accounted for some good, and funny expressions..
Some of the following are how the revisionsts would have us re-interpret the 2nd Amendment.
During the 60's-70's a cigarette was called a fag, right? No further explanation necessary, so I won't offend some others out there.
Everybody remembers the TV Sitcom, "Leave it to Beaver"? I'm sure you've all heard the twist on that then. Where June Cleaver asked Ward, "You were a little hard on the Beaver last night, weren't you Ward"? Today that remark has a distinct meaning FAR from the original comment.
Take a coffin nail for instance. 150 years ago a coffin nail was just that, not a cigarette, right?
Moving right along. Anybody here ever heard the phrase, "Gay Paris"? Gay used to mean happy, and light-hearted. Now, of course, it represents a distinct sexually oriented crowd of the world.
And it's this conversion of meanings that occur through the generations that have the impact we're dealing with. Coupled with the innate desire of some to also convert this country to something else besides a Republic.
The following link might shed some light on this Democratic Society we've heard our electeds in WDC speak of
http://www.worldsocialism.org/main.htm
Best Regards,
Don
------------------
The most foolish mistake we could make would be to allow the subjected people to carry arms; history shows that all conquerers who have allowed their subjected people to carry arms have prepared their own fall.
Adolf Hitler
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>I think that you may be getting yourself worked up over nothing.[/quote]No, I was just happy to find documents on the meaning of well-regulated. If you read the thread I started in legal and political about the first draft of the 2nd amendment, you'll see that I have a particular congresscritter who claims that well-regulated means legislated out of existence. Click here for a liberal republican's rationalization of gun control.
------------------
Protect your Right to Keep and Bear Arms!
------------------
Protect your Right to Keep and Bear Arms!
Jeff Thomas
New member
Well, Mr. Campbell doesn't sound very sharp on this particular issue, but he does sound educatable. And, I've got to believe he'd be a damn sight better than your existing Senators ... that's a sure thing.
Regards from AZ
Regards from AZ
Gorthaur,
Your post was right on. That was exactly what I was looking for. Thank you for providing excellent examples of usage. The Second Amendment talks about two things: The Militia, and The Right to Keep and Bear Arms. That is why there is only ONE comma separating the two subjects contained in the amendment.
Your post was right on. That was exactly what I was looking for. Thank you for providing excellent examples of usage. The Second Amendment talks about two things: The Militia, and The Right to Keep and Bear Arms. That is why there is only ONE comma separating the two subjects contained in the amendment.
It all realy comes down to what the meaning of "is" is... "I did not, have, sexual relations, with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky."
It doesn't matter what the words actually mean, or what the philosophy was at the time. Because they will simply spin whatever definition fits.
When i get into a discussion with "anti's" about the symantics of the 2nd Amendment, i simply bring up the current spinsters and ask them to give me a good reason that i shouldn't take what they say for granted. They then tell me it's just spin, and i agree. The 1st Amendment has been twisted into a horrible mess also.
Personaly, i think that it may be time to play the game on their level. Recently, when i get into it with an anti i drive the discussion to a conclusion that gun control is sexist, racist, classist and elitist; and i believe i'm haveing good luck with them.
They generally have a very difficult time swallowing those labels. Furthermore, they are the truth.
~USP
PS. Having said all that, i will keep this info on the definition of "well-regulated" in mind, and use it where i can... Thanks!
It doesn't matter what the words actually mean, or what the philosophy was at the time. Because they will simply spin whatever definition fits.
When i get into a discussion with "anti's" about the symantics of the 2nd Amendment, i simply bring up the current spinsters and ask them to give me a good reason that i shouldn't take what they say for granted. They then tell me it's just spin, and i agree. The 1st Amendment has been twisted into a horrible mess also.
Personaly, i think that it may be time to play the game on their level. Recently, when i get into it with an anti i drive the discussion to a conclusion that gun control is sexist, racist, classist and elitist; and i believe i'm haveing good luck with them.
They generally have a very difficult time swallowing those labels. Furthermore, they are the truth.
~USP
PS. Having said all that, i will keep this info on the definition of "well-regulated" in mind, and use it where i can... Thanks!
Jeff Thomas, I doubt very seriously that Tom Campbell would be any "better" than Diane Frankenstein. Cambell is nothing more than just another snake oil salesman, who calls himself a "moderate" Republican. Read that "moderate" as meaning that he hates, loathes and despises the Constitution and thinks that Big Brother and Big Nanny should control every moment of the lives of us serfs.
From living in Kalifornia for 35 years and fighting constantly for our Second Article Right, and losing, I've dealt with the "Tom Cambpells" too many times not to know what a back stabber he is. He is just another wannabee tyrant who believes that your/my life belongs to the State, and to the criminals. The only way you may "save" your life, when attacked, is if you have crawled on hands and knees to him/Big Brother, and begged permission to own a tool for self defense.
Campbell is just as devious and insideous as his ancestors were when they murdered the MacDonald clan in Scotland. FWIW. J.B.
From living in Kalifornia for 35 years and fighting constantly for our Second Article Right, and losing, I've dealt with the "Tom Cambpells" too many times not to know what a back stabber he is. He is just another wannabee tyrant who believes that your/my life belongs to the State, and to the criminals. The only way you may "save" your life, when attacked, is if you have crawled on hands and knees to him/Big Brother, and begged permission to own a tool for self defense.
Campbell is just as devious and insideous as his ancestors were when they murdered the MacDonald clan in Scotland. FWIW. J.B.