Preaching to the Choir

[stanc]

Wow, this has been an entirely useless thread! No one has actually mentioned that there is PLENTY of documentation of Founding Fathers thought and writings on the reasoning for the 2nd Amendment. Washington for instance, "A free people ought not only to be armed but disciplined; to which end a uniform and well digested plan is requisite: And their safety and interest require that they should promote such manufactories, as tend to render them independent on others, for essential, particularly for military supplies."

That quote supports the idea that the 2A is concerned only with arming the militia.

“Following the revolution but previous to the adoption of the Constitution, debates over militia proposals occupied a large part of the political scene. A variety of plans were put forth by figures ranging from George Washington to Baron von Steuben. All of the proposals called for a general duty of all citizens to be armed.” (Sources: The most extensive studies of these militia proposals are John McAuley Palmer, Washington, Lincoln, Wilson: Three War Statesmen (New York, 1930); Frederick Stern, Citizen Army (New York,1957); John Mahon, The American Militia: Decade of Decision 1789-1800 (Univ of Florida, 1960).)

Also supports the idea that the 2A is concerned only with arming the militia.

“A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves... and include all men capable of bearing arms.”
― Richard Henry Lee, The Letters of Richard Henry Lee 1762-1778 V1

Partial truth. Only able-bodied, white males of military age were required to be in the militia, not all adults, so the militia would in fact be only some of the people.

"Arms in the hands of citizens [may] be used at individual discretion... in private self-defense..." - John Adams, A defense of the Constitutions of the Government of the USA, 471(1788

Too bad the 2A says nothing about individual self-defense.

“The Right is General - It might be supposed from the phraseology of this provision that the right to keep and bear arms was only guaranteed to the militia but this would be an interpretation not warranted by the intent.”
― Thomas McIntyre Cooley, General Principles of Constitutional Law in the United States of America;

Illogical statement. That is not an "interpretation." That is the meaning of what is actually written. To claim that it means something other than what it says would be an interpretation using what he thinks the author intended.

This is only a short version, but there is little doubt what the Framers intended with the 2nd Amendment if you actually research and read their writings.

1. AFAIK, the 2nd Amendment was written solely by James Madison -- not by any of the others you quoted -- and what you quoted him as saying is so vague that it offers no real insight into his intent.

2. If you're going to take the position that the 2nd Amendment does not mean what it says, then it can mean whatever the reader wants it to mean.