Apparently you don't know what the Second Amendment says. In its entirety, "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." It's obvious that the couple is not part of any well-regulated militia; they are just lawless people pointing guns at unarmed people walking by their house. (It's also obvious from the video that they don't know how to safely handle guns!)
Oh, I know what is says. I know how the founders described it. I know the conventional debates. The militia and the people are made of the same. At that time every able body man at the age of 18 was to be part of the local militia. It was the people or minute men who would respond to local threats. These men were farmers, pastors, church members, lawyers, doctors, tailors, butchers, etc. And even children would be taught as young as 8 how to shoot. Self Defense was none debatable as at that time it was an illogical argument. British was paying Indians scalp bounties on American Patriots, the British loyalist could have been your neighbor and in some locations, you could have been dragged off for supporting the American cause. Wildlife was more of a threat.
William Blackstone the English law commentator that the founding fathers used as a reference described why the right of the people to keep and bear Arms was also important within the Castle doctrine. Meaning every man is the king of his castle and has the right to protect his life, liberty, and property.
To protect liberty involves a collective group or a militia. Which was every citizen who could respond to the situation.
States under the Constitution also was given more liberty than the federal government. Meaning they could create even stricter constitutions that would double protect their God-given rights.
"When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the
Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
These God-given rights are as the Declaration states, "We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are
Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.—That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed,—That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles, and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to affect their Safety and Happiness."
Life is sacred and considered of the natural law that everything living does all it can to survive including the defense of self. To also protect the life of the people. They needed guns if the Government becomes destructive then worst case scenario they would have the power to abolish it instead of being enslaved.
Thomas Hobbes another of the founder's sources for his political theory (1588–1679) said this below,
The Right of Nature, which Writers commonly call Jus Naturale, is the Liberty each man hath, to use his own power, as he will himselfe, for the preservation of his own Nature; that is to say, of his own Life; and consequently, of doing any thing, which in his own Judgement, and Reason, hee shall conceive to be the aptest means thereunto.
The human nature, laws of nature, or as Romans 2 describes as the moral law can not only show life is sacred but also proves the human nature too often leans towards wickedness. As a murderer may be just fine taking life until he self evidently proves life is sacred when faced with execution. The Founding fathers understood human nature as to why we have the 2nd Amendment. The most referenced source was the Bible. 2nd is John Locke.
John Locke explained this in his own words.
"He, that, in the state of nature, would take away the freedom that belongs to anyone in that state must necessarily be supposed to have a design to take away everything else, that freedom being the foundation of all the rest; as he that, in a state of society, would take away the freedom belonging to those of that society or commonwealth must be supposed to design to take away from them everything else, and so be looked on as in a state of war….
Thus a thief, whom I cannot harm but by appeal to the [civil] law for having stolen all that I am worth, I may kill when he sets on me to rob me but of my horse or coat; because the law, which was made for my preservation, where it cannot interpose to secure my life from present force, which, if lost, is capable of no reparation, permits me my own defense and the right of war, a liberty to kill the aggressor, because the aggressor allows not time to appeal to our common judge, nor the decision of the law, for remedy in a case where the mischief may be irreparable."
Basically the old way of saying that the wicked do not care for society's laws.
The 2nd Amendment has two points to protect.
- The Militia
- The right of the People
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."
As for saying the couple was lawless well not according to facts that you still deny.
Anyways civics class is complete. If you pass the test I'll give you a thumbs up.