who believes that the founders intended to have our nation defended by a large standing army, rather than an armed citizenry formed into well regulated militias? I think it is clear the founder did not want a large, professional, standing army And they did want the militia to fill this role And THAT was a major intent of the2nd amendment And imo To some extent, the whole current discussion of the 2nd and founders intent about gun ownership is off point... because they were mostly addressing the issues of militia based national defense which would remove the need, expense, and risk of maintaining a large standing army Well, we HAVE a large standing army... so whether we like it or not, we have moved far afield from the founders intent on the issues they were thinking about Btw... I am not addressing my own personal views on gun rights should be... just expressing a view about the founders intent and that current discussions about founders intent do not reflect what they were actually thinking or intending
I know one thing-none of the founders believed that the federal government was being delegated any power to tell private citizens what arms they could keep and bear in their own homes
Yea But that does not mean they would agree to people having their own grenades and rpg rockets. It was a subject they did not deeply consider because muskets were what was available at the time
You are correct regarding the 2nd Amendment, but incorrect in the rest. The 2nd was to protect states right to have a state militia, it exempted state militia from the Constitutional prohibition against a permanent army. The 2nd originally was not to protect the individual right to own firearms (including cannon). The Founder saw no need for such protection since the Constitution provided the federal govt with enumerated powers (powers defined clearly in the Constitution) and granted all powers not explicitly delegated to the federal govt to the states and the people. Under original intent, nowhere in the Constitution does the federal govt have the power to perform "gun control". States can engage in gun control, the feds cannot. The 2nd Amendment took on the current idea that it is all about protecting an individuals rights as the Constitutional interpretation was turned on its head to mean the feds get all power and the people only get what the Bill of Rights gives them.
