![imthebestatcod](/avatars/26294.jpg)
imthebestatcod
21.08.2019 •
History
During the strong constitutional convention who pushed for a strong republic but did not want to model the american system after the british system?
Solved
Show answers
More tips
- F Food and Cooking How to Calculate the Gender of Your Child with Blood?...
- S Society and Politics 10 Tips for Boosting Your Self-Esteem...
- C Computers and Internet How to Create a Folder on Your iPhone?...
- G Goods and services How to sew a ribbon: Tips for beginners...
- F Food and Cooking How to Make Mayonnaise at Home? Secrets of Homemade Mayonnaise...
- C Computers and Internet Which Phone is Best for Internet Surfing?...
- F Food and Cooking Everything You Need to Know About Pasta...
- C Computers and Internet How to Choose a Monitor?...
- H Horoscopes, Magic, Divination Where Did Tarot Cards Come From?...
Answers on questions: History
- H History in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, eurasia experienced a period of intensified interaction under the rule of the...
- H History Describe 2 ways an organism can become a fossil withought being buried in sediment...
- H History While nationalism was a uniting force in Germany and Italy, how can it work the opposite way?...
- H History HELP NOW PLS Why does Tony follow Narciso but not join him? How do you think things would have ended differently if Tony had stayed closer to Narciso? Book:bless me ultima...
- H History What type of legislation did Jane Addams and her colleagues try to get government to adopt?...
- H History What was the Age of Enlightenment? Group of answer choices a period where two large lamps were used to illuminate Europe. a period of intense warfare between the kingdoms...
- H History What does a Constitution explain? Jot down some similarities for later… (already have the first question I need the second part)...
- H History There both the same PLS HELP I NEED THIS LIKE RIGHT NOW IT S DO at 11:30 PM...
- H History Slavery grievance –jefferson source: thomas jefferson was born to a slave-owning family and he himself owned slaves. as chairman of the committee that drafted the declaration...
- H History Name the arthropod that caused of the destruction of ulmus americana?...
Ответ:
Ответ:
Explanation:Modern debates about the Second Amendment have focused on whether it protects a private right of individuals to keep and bear arms, or a right that can be exercised only through militia organizations like the National Guard. This question, however, was not even raised until long after the Bill of Rights was adopted.
Many in the Founding generation believed that governments are prone to use soldiers to oppress the people. English history suggested that this risk could be controlled by permitting the government to raise armies (consisting of full-time paid troops) only when needed to fight foreign adversaries. For other purposes, such as responding to sudden invasions or other emergencies, the government could rely on a militia that consisted of ordinary civilians who supplied their own weapons and received some part-time, unpaid military training.
The onset of war does not always allow time to raise and train an army, and the Revolutionary War showed that militia forces could not be relied on for national defense. The Constitutional Convention therefore decided that the federal government should have almost unfettered authority to establish peacetime standing armies and to regulate the militia.
This massive shift of power from the states to the federal government generated one of the chief objections to the proposed Constitution. Anti-Federalists argued that the proposed Constitution would take from the states their principal means of defense against federal usurpation. The Federalists responded that fears of federal oppression were overblown, in part because the American people were armed and would be almost impossible to subdue through military force.
Implicit in the debate between Federalists and Anti-Federalists were two shared assumptions. First, that the proposed new Constitution gave the federal government almost total legal authority over the army and militia. Second, that the federal government should not have any authority at all to disarm the citizenry. They disagreed only about whether an armed populace could adequately deter federal oppression.
The Second Amendment conceded nothing to the Anti-Federalists’ desire to sharply curtail the military power of the federal government, which would have required substantial changes in the original Constitution. Yet the Amendment was easily accepted because of widespread agreement that the federal government should not have the power to infringe the right of the people to keep and bear arms, any more than it should have the power to abridge the freedom of speech or prohibit the free exercise of religion.
Much has changed since 1791. The traditional militia fell into desuetude, and state-based militia organizations were eventually incorporated into the federal military structure. The nation’s military establishment has become enormously more powerful than eighteenth century armies. We still hear political rhetoric about federal tyranny, but most Americans do not fear the nation’s armed forces and virtually no one thinks that an armed populace could defeat those forces in battle. Furthermore, eighteenth century civilians routinely kept at home the very same weapons they would need if called to serve in the militia, while modern soldiers are equipped with weapons that differ significantly from those generally thought appropriate for civilian uses. Civilians no longer expect to use their household weapons for militia duty, although they still keep and bear arms to defend against common criminals (as well as for hunting and other forms of recreation).