Gun Control & RKBA

as evidenced by these words: Being necessary to the security of a free state. The role of the militia was and is to secure a state of freedom within the US. The right to keep and bear arms was therefore given to the militia to ensure a perpetual state of freedom.

Large standing armies were recognized as a necessary evil in times of war. They were, however, never intended to be indefinitely quartered within our borders during times of peace nor were they ever intended to replace the role of the civilian militia in any way.

This is, first and foremost, codified in the second amendment itself. What's more, language to this effect is further codified in numerous state constitutions. For example, in Ohio, my state, our constitution states: The people have the right to bear arms for their defense and security; but standing armies, in time of peace, are dangerous to liberty, and shall not be kept up; and the military shall be in strict subordination to the civil power.

and in Massachusetts: The people have a right to keep and to bear arms for the common defence. And as, in time of peace, armies are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be maintained without the consent of the legislature; and the military power shall always be held in an exact subordination to the civil authority, and be governed by it

And in Kansas: The people have the right to bear arms for their defense and security; but standing armies, in time of peace, are dangerous to liberty, and shall not be tolerated, and the military shall be in strict subordination to the civil power

and In North Carolina: 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, as standing armies in time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they shall not be maintained, and the military shall be kept under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.

South Carolina: 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. As, in times of peace, armies are dangerous to liberty, they shall not be maintained without the consent of the General Assembly. The military power of the State shall always be held in subordination to the civil authority and be governed by it.

Vermont: That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the State -- and as standing armies in time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up; and that the military should be kept under strict subordination to and governed by the civil power.

Virginia: That a well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state, therefore, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty; and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.


What ought to be taken away from this is that large standing armies ought not be maintained in times of peace and ought not be justification for nullifying the right to keep and bear arms (as if there is any chance of that happening anyways).