nermal

In the context of the second amendment, "regulated" didn't mean operating under legislative controls, as in regulated through legislative means. It meant practiced and efficatious. To be "well regulated" was to be a "regular" or practiced militia member. It stems from old British laws requiring some citizens to practice regularly with bow and arrow. The militia is a clearly defined segment of the US population, and is not related to the National Guard.

As to tanks and such, some "constitutional fundamentalists" would interperet the 2nd to say they may own tanks, as such can be reasonably expected to be used in a military context. However, at some point, the safety of everyone must be balanced against the efficacy of a "militia" and thus large scale weapons such as tanks can be disallowed. This is the philosophical arena in which the entire gun control debate occurs now.

Ed\

Sakpo

Unlikely. A "militia" is a group of amateur soldiers, ordinary citizens rather than full time, salaried, soldiers. "The militia" can also refer to the body of people considered fit for military service at large who are not serving in the military. Neither group would normally be able or need to have tanks, which are expensive pieces of equipment that require the sort of training professional soldiers get, not members of a militia.

Tristan Scott

Not according to Jefferson. He wrote that the governor of each state was "constitutionally the commander of the militia" of his state, as outlined in Article I, section 8 of the Constitution. You should read the Militia Act of 1792.

As to the National Guard, the Dick Act of 1903 converted all the state militias into the National Guard.

bleubird

"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."
I have the impression the commas have a lot to do with meaning of this sentence.

bleubird

RufusAtticus

In America oridinary citizens can own tanks, they're just not street legal. However, in Britian tanks are street legal. I watch a mini-documentary on the History Channel on a guy who liked to drive his yellow tank arround London.

Stephen Maturin

Heh. He said "Dick Act."

But that reference brings to mind a relatively little known fact. Are you an able-bodied American male between the ages of seventeen and forty-four who isn't in the regular armed forces? If so, you're part of the Militia of the United States, whether you like it or not. 13 U.S.C. sec. 311. Having just recently finished my own militia service without ever being "called up," I'll wish you younger gents the same good fortune.

hedonist ogre

I think so. In the 18th century, national armies didn't have access to weapons that were much better than what the general populace could reasonably own. A town full of musket-toting farmers had a good chance of at least slowing down an advancing army. These days, even if it were legal, the average person is just not going to set up an SAM battery in his backyard to help fend off an invading force.