Kansas Constitution regarding gun rights may change in Novembor

[libertybrewcity]

If Kansas voters enact the measure, Section 4 of the Kansas Bill of Rights would read as follows:
A person has the right to keep and bear arms for the defense of self, family, home and state, for lawful hunting and recreational use, and for any other lawful purpose.

The text of Section 4 of the Kansas Bill of Rights currently reads:
The people have the right to bear arms for their defense and security; but standing armies, in time of peace, are dangerous to liberty, and shall not be tolerated, and the military shall be in strict subordination to the civil power

http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Kansas_Right_to_Bear_Arms_Question,_2010

What do you think of this proposal? I don't know what to make of the elimination of the "standing armies" section.

[rmodel65]

standing armies arent a threat anymore?? maybe they should leave that language in there

[Anti Federalist]

Can't have that "standing armies" part in there, since we are, in every state, up to our collective assholes in "standing armies". Somebody might make them take their constitution at it's word.

Local cops, county cops, federal cops, ATF, FBI, NG, just to name a few.

We're lousy with state enforcers consisting of what could only be called standing armies.

[Baptist]

If Kansas voters enact the measure, Section 4 of the Kansas Bill of Rights would read as follows:
A person has the right to keep and bear arms for the defense of self, family, home and state, for lawful hunting and recreational use, and for any other lawful purpose.

The text of Section 4 of the Kansas Bill of Rights currently reads:
The people have the right to bear arms for their defense and security; but standing armies, in time of peace, are dangerous to liberty, and shall not be tolerated, and the military shall be in strict subordination to the civil power

http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Kansas_Right_to_Bear_Arms_Question,_2010

What do you think of this proposal? I don't know what to make of the elimination of the "standing armies" section.

Fixed.
A person has the right to keep and bear arms for the defense of self, family, home and state, for lawful hunting and recreational use, and for any other lawful purpose; but standing armies, in time of peace, are dangerous to liberty, and shall not be tolerated, and the military shall be in strict subordination to the civil power.

[Southron]

Fixed.
A person has the right to keep and bear arms for the defense of self, family, home and state, for lawful hunting and recreational use, and for any other lawful purpose; but standing armies, in time of peace, are dangerous to liberty, and shall not be tolerated, and the military shall be in strict subordination to the civil power.

Exactly. No need to remove the standing armies part.

[Pericles]

You could say that this language in the Constitution makes the troops clause redundant:

"No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay."

But, of course, that only applies if you think the Constitution applies to the States as well as the Federal government.;)

[osan]

Fixed.
A person has the right to keep and bear arms for the defense of self, family, home and state, for lawful hunting and recreational use, and for any other lawful purpose; but standing armies, in time of peace, are dangerous to liberty, and shall not be tolerated, and the military shall be in strict subordination to the civil power.


A person has the right to keep and bear arms for the defense of self, family, home, property, and state, for lawful hunting and recreational use, and for any other lawful purpose; but standing armies, in time of peace, are dangerous to liberty, and shall not be tolerated, and the military shall be in strict subordination to the civil power.

All home is property, but not all property is home.