The 2nd Amendment actually DOES guarantee private ownership of firearms. The common argument here lies around the use of the word militia in the Amendment. It is often assumed that this refers to organizations such as the National Guard. This is incorrect. At the time the Constitution and Bill of Rights were authored, there was no formal militia. The right could not be guaranteed to an organized militia that did not exist. The definition of the term militia in the amendment roughly translates to any man old enough to fight.
This page describes the issue pretty well. I'll borrow from it:
[The Supreme Court] held the National Guard is an integral component of the US Army Reserve system (it has been since 1916). It further supported its ruling by specifying the difference between the "special militia" (in this case the Minnesota Guard) instead of the "general militia" (citizens with privately procured and owned arms) as expressed in the 2nd Amendment. Also in 1990 the Court in another case affirmed the definition of "the people" expressed in the Bill of Rights as meaning individual persons, not a group.
Taking that out of the picture for a moment, how does interstate commerce factor into gun control? I don't understand this. Or is that the point? Interstate commerce is a nice gray area that can be stretched to cover any powers that have become useful. The Gun Control Act seems to apply well, licenses are required to sell guns. Great. How does the Firearm Act apply?
This does not address the question of where to find objective information and statistics related to the gun control issue. What I have is a simple question. Give 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; and the 10th Amendment: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people; what is the constitutional basis for federal gun control laws?
In one instance, the Constitution says gun ownership (actually, weapons in general) must be allowed. In the case of the 10th Amendment, it says that the Government can only do what is expressly stated it can do in the Constitution. Where does the Constitution say the Government can restrict gun ownership (or outlaw technology for copying DVDs for that matter)?
Slashdot Mirror
This page describes the issue pretty well. I'll borrow from it:
Taking that out of the picture for a moment, how does interstate commerce factor into gun control? I don't understand this. Or is that the point? Interstate commerce is a nice gray area that can be stretched to cover any powers that have become useful. The Gun Control Act seems to apply well, licenses are required to sell guns. Great. How does the Firearm Act apply?This does not address the question of where to find objective information and statistics related to the gun control issue. What I have is a simple question. Give 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; and the 10th Amendment: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people; what is the constitutional basis for federal gun control laws? In one instance, the Constitution says gun ownership (actually, weapons in general) must be allowed. In the case of the 10th Amendment, it says that the Government can only do what is expressly stated it can do in the Constitution. Where does the Constitution say the Government can restrict gun ownership (or outlaw technology for copying DVDs for that matter)?