A federal judge in Minnesota on Friday struck down a state restriction limiting handgun carry permits to those over age 21, in a case brought by the Second Amendment Foundation, citing Second Amendment guidelines in last year’s Supreme Court Bruen ruling. The case is known as Worth v. Harrington. [More]
What does the historical tradition say?
UPDATE
Fun fact: The judge was appointed by President Biden… [More]
This on yahoo news today. It looked to me that what Hamilton was describing was not instituted and supported by the feds until the National Guard came along 100+ years later. Now yahoo thinks you need to be an NG member before you are allowed arms. Comment?
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/what-is-a-well-regulated-militia-no-less-than-alexander-hamilton-defined-it-for-us/ar-AA19hoem?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=e49edd7c3e334042876801e6fa7fa5ba&ei=15
As for the militia of the Second Amendment being the National Guard, here’s what the Subcommittee on the Constitution of the United States Senate Ninety-Seventh Congress had to say:
“Congress has established the present National Guard under its own power to raise armies, expressly stating that it was not doing so under its power to organize and arm the militia.
This understanding is codified under US Code, TITLE 10 – ARMED FORCES, Subtitle A – General Military Law, PART I – ORGANIZATION AND GENERAL MILITARY POWERS, CHAPTER 13 – THE MILITIA, Sec. 311. Militia: composition and classes:
(b) The classes of the militia are –
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.”
Then we have the assertion that in order to claim the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms, citizens must be members of a “well regulated militia.” No less an authority than Alexander Hamilton disagreed with that, writing in The Federalist No. 29:
“To oblige the great body of the yeomanry, and of the other classes of the citizens, to be under arms for the purpose of going through military exercises and evolutions, as often as might be necessary to acquire the degree of perfection which would entitle them to the character of a well-regulated militia, would be a real grievance to the people, and a serious public inconvenience and loss…Little more can reasonably be aimed at, with respect to the people at large, than to have them properly armed and equipped…”
All we need to know: PROPERLY ARMED AND EQUIPPED!