aoffan23 wrote:No, it means that a certain amount of people who form a militia can have guns. It doesn't mean everyone and their dog can have one, because not everyone is part of the militia.
Patrick Henry, 3 Elliot Debates 168-169 wrote:“Are we at last brought to such a humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our own defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in our possession and under our own direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?"
Back in the 18th century, a “regular” army meant an army that had standard military equipment. So a “well regulated” army was simply one that was “well equipped” and organized. It does not refer to a professional army. The 17th century folks used the term “standing army” or “regulars” to describe a professional army. In my opinion, “a well regulated militia” only means a well equipped militia that was organized and maintained internal discipline. It does not imply the modern meaning of “regulated,” which means controlled or administered by some superior entity. Federal control over the militia comes from other parts of the Constitution, but not from the Second Amendment.
The Militia is composed of the whole of the American People- A militia, therefore, is simply composed of *part* of the American people- as even in times of war the idea of arming every
single citizen and sending them off to fight is absurd.