>>>>>>>>>> Given all their lofty ideals it's hard for me to believe the founders envisioned an entire society running around armed to the teeth.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Actually, in the American of the 18th century it would have been hard for the Founders to imagine a society where everyone was *not* armed. Militia was a gathering of *armed* citizens - their own guns.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>You're right, of course. I wasn't thinking too well to add that extra sentence. I still think they put the word "militia" in there for a reason.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Since personal gun ownership was taken as given, I suppose it was to emphasize that with this came responsibility.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>And often in these debates it is the ninth amendment that seems to be forgotten
>>>>>>
>>>>>>The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Rights are there thanks to "Nature and Nature's God" and it is up to the State to find a compelling reason to abridge them.
>>>>>
>>>>>"Taken as given" -- that's one way to resolve the question! LOL. You get extra points for the ingenuity of that one, Mr. H.
>>>>
>>>>Where's the ingenuity. Historical fact. Gun ownership in America in 1789 was taken as given. It would not have occurred to any of the Founders that the government could forbid citizens to own guns. The second amendment precludes any future tyrant from trying to do so.
>>>
>>>Except that, if it would not have occurred to them that they could forbid citizens to own guns, it should logically not have occurred to them to create the 2nd amendment either.
>>
>>Not at all. They were very sensitive to the idea of creating government that would not devolve into tyranny. The were actually a cynical bunch. They were not trying to create a New Man (ala the French and Russian revolutions) but were dealing with man as they perceived him to be - flawed, venal, and never to be given too much power over another. I think they wanted to make sure power was dispersed enough that there would always be counterbalances.
>
>Sure, I understand that, but if, as you said, "it would not have occurred to any of the Founders that the Government could forbid citizens to own guns", how did it occur to them to make sure? Most times, if something could not occur to me, I generally don't rush out and make sure of doing something about it.

Okay, I get it. Should have said "It would not have ocurred to any of them that the Government should or should be allowed to forbid citizens to own guns."