Home deliveries of knives bought online to be banned in UK

[stanc]

First I would like to say I'm happy to see you are feeling better Stan and I have missed your presence here on the forum. It gets kind of boring with out your unique take on things.

Thanks. Although I'm pretty sure there are some folks here who don't share that sentiment.

When I was talking about a disarmed nation I was referring to nations like Germany and Japan after WW2.

Ah. Very true. Good examples.

As the divide among our founding fathers you are correct about their division on many issues but I have never seen any of this divide when it came to the Second Amendment.

Concur. But, regarding the Founders views in regard to the 2A, I "found" (pun intended ) an interesting article:

The framers and adopters of the Second Amendment were generally ardent supporters of the idea of well-regulated liberty. Without strong governments and effective laws, they believed, liberty inevitably degenerated into licentiousness and eventually anarchy. Diligent students of history, particularly Roman history, the Federalists who wrote the Constitution realized that tyranny more often resulted from anarchy, not strong government.

When I began this research, most people assumed that regulation was a relatively recent phenomenon, something associated with the rise of big government in the modern era. Actually, while the founding generation certainly esteemed the idea of an armed population, they were also ardent supporters of gun regulations.

Categories of gun laws that the Founders endorsed.

Registration
Today American gun rights advocates typically oppose any form of registration...and typically argue that registration violates the Second Amendment. This claim is also hard to square with the history of the nation’s founding. All of the colonies – apart from Quaker-dominated Pennsylvania, the one colony in which religious pacifists blocked the creation of a militia – enrolled local citizens...in state-regulated militias. The colonies and then the newly independent states kept track of these privately owned weapons required for militia service.

Public carry
The American colonies inherited a variety of restrictions that evolved under English Common Law. In 18th-century England, armed travel was limited to a few well-defined occasions such as assisting justices of the peace and constables. Members of the upper classes also had a limited exception to travel with arms. Concealable weapons such as handguns were subject to even more stringent restrictions.

The American Revolution did not sweep away English common law. In fact, most colonies adopted common law as it had been interpreted in the colonies prior to independence, including the ban on traveling armed in populated areas. Thus, there was no general right of armed travel when the Second Amendment was adopted, and certainly no right to travel with concealed weapons.

Loyalty oaths
One of the most common claims one hears in the modern Second Amendment debate is the assertion that the Founders included this provision in the Constitution to make possible a right of revolution. But this claim, too, rests on a serious misunderstanding of the role the right to bear arms played in American constitutional theory.

In fact, the Founders engaged in large-scale disarmament of the civilian population during the American Revolution. The right to bear arms was conditional on swearing a loyalty oath to the government. Individuals who refused to swear such an oath were disarmed.

The notion that the Second Amendment was understood to protect a right to take up arms against the government is absurd. Indeed, the Constitution itself defines such an act as treason.

http://theconversation.com/five-types-of...oved-85364