The courts are often wrong and the legislature is often adverse to the preservation of inalienable rights. They err in favor of preserving or expanded the power of greater governance. The number of rounds that maybe used for self defense cannot be determined from statistical applications without first determining what may define self defense; self defense may be a proactive measure taken against a tyrannical government. "Arms" is a reference to weapons. Because the writers knew arms evolved as tools for defense and offense. After all, the "Bill of Rights" were written in a time when any one who could buy or build just about any sort of weapon did, and though used for war, nearly every form of arms were developed and manufactured by civilians. In 1791, if you wanted a working field cannon in your front yard, you could.The citizenry had access to the same arms available to any formal military and it was a civilian militia that fought for and won our independence. This is as important now is it was then. Perhaps more so, as the corruption of our governance has evolved as well.
Very well done. I particularly liked the how Gura responded to the question from one audience member asking how they separated the militia clause from the individual right to bear arms.
The courts are often wrong and the legislature is often adverse to the preservation of inalienable rights. They err in favor of preserving or expanded the power of greater governance.
The number of rounds that maybe used for self defense cannot be determined from statistical applications without first determining what may define self defense; self defense may be a proactive measure taken against a tyrannical government.
"Arms" is a reference to weapons. Because the writers knew arms evolved as tools for defense and offense. After all, the "Bill of Rights" were written in a time when any one who could buy or build just about any sort of weapon did, and though used for war, nearly every form of arms were developed and manufactured by civilians.
In 1791, if you wanted a working field cannon in your front yard, you could.The citizenry had access to the same arms available to any formal military and it was a civilian militia that fought for and won our independence.
This is as important now is it was then. Perhaps more so, as the corruption of our governance has evolved as well.
Thanks to William A. Jacobson Associate Clinical Professor, @ Cornell Law School for the heads up on this informative video.
Very well done.
I particularly liked the how Gura responded to the question from one audience member asking how they separated the militia clause from the individual right to bear arms.