What kind of "arms" is meant in the second amendment.?

Question

At the time of the Constitution, powder and ball weapons were the handheld arms along with swords and bayonets. Cannon were available. Now we have tanks, bombs, grenades, rockets, etcetera besides all the usual handheld pistols and rifles. Arms aren't they?

Answer 1

There had just been a war with England, and people were a little on the nervous side.  They put that in the constitution as a way of saying "Trust us.  You can keep your guns if any c**p goes down."

Answer 2

All.

The Constitution was written so that the common man would not be ruled by a tyrannical government & that the Government was to be scared of the people.

Not the people scared of the Government & if this was the case then the people are armed so they can revolt against the government.

Answer 3

Could be a nuclear weapon...

Hmmmm I can just feel the warm prickly feeling of safety, knowing I have a nuclear grenade to catapult-launch at an advancing horde of people (assuming that day comes one day)...

Answer 4

Oui, but the state governments determine what kind of arms we can have, as long as they don't ban too many or all arms. Frankly, I wouldn't feel safe knowing my next door neighbor was packing mustard gas grenades.

Answer 5

When the Constitution was written none could have predicted or even conceived the weapons and weapons systems we have today! At that time, cannon, mortars and flint lock muskets, pistols and swords were state of the art and that is what was meant.Today, the founding fathers would be bewildered and dismayed by the lethality of modern weapons and probably would have more clearly defined what was intended. That intent was that INDIVIDUALS  have the ABSOLUTE RIGHT  to DEFEND THEMSELVES, THEIR FAMILY'S and THEIR PROPERTY against ANY THREAT THAT PRESENTS ITSELF!! Whether its a gang banger car jacking you in the street or a COP smashing through the door in the dead of night screaming 'POLICE, SEARCH WARRANT!'  Both should be shot dead on the spot!

Answer 6

by whatever means would be my guess. most would agree a pistol would do the job. i have three in different rooms in my house. it is what protects us from criminals and the gov.

Answer 7

I thought it meant underarms. On the real side, the govt has a better capacity to regulate weapons than they did in 1776. Not only that, the Constitution of that time is obsolete. I hear master debaters on television always talking about what they 'believe the framers had in mind', like who cares. Some of them, like Jefferson and Washington, had slave raping on their minds. The sick b******s of yesteryear were just as illmatic as the Larry Craigs and Elliot Spitzers of today. Your "right to bear arms for a well regulated militia" is just pure stupid nonsense. The government got more guns than any militia can go up against.

Answer 8

Our Founding Fathers are renowned for the structure of this system. They were also inventors. This could really define any kind of weapons.

However, the society is also regulated in a way that strives to prevents John Doe from carrying a nuclear missile in the back of his Ford Fiesta. Our government is the arbitor of all laws for the force of the constitution and it also provides rights to modify and adapt laws as its society changes. This is a far cry from ancient Israel of the Holy Bible/Septuagint. Ah, simpler times... and even they had their wars.... Personally, I think that nuclear missiles should be destroyed. But the cat flew out of that bag 50 years ago. It is a difficult question to answer. As I look at the culture of the United States, there is an elite class, like there is in any other country. I would probably ask one of them.

Answer 9

The way arms is used in the second amendment it seems to imply any weapon that would be useful in defending the state from, invasion or if the federal government started to abuse it's power.

The problem comes with the fact that at the time this was written it was reasonable ( it'd just been done) that a lot of private citizens with guns could over throw the government even if the government maintained control of the military.

In our day and age that's not practical. I don't care how many assault rifles we had there's not chance we be able to defend out selves against bombs, fighter jets, tanks, and choppers.

Unless someone insanely wealthy financed such a rebellion we'd have no chance.

The other part of it is would you really feel more comfortable knowing Ross Perot , Ted Turnner or Donald Trump owned a nuclear weapon, or a fleet of b2 bombers?

So once you realize this isn't really partical the question is can we just reinturpt this part of the consitution or do we need to attempt the nearly impossible task of modifying it?

Answer 10

i prefer somthing with  a trigger!!

Answer 11

"ARMS" good enough to pretect your harth and home, and overthrow the govenment if and when it is deemed to big and currupt.

So say the founding fathers

Being that the cops now carry black guns, so shall WE THE PEOPLE