New State Constitution.

S

SKULLANDCROSSBONES65

New member
G'day. The Northern Territory (Australia) is calling for submissions to a proposed constitution. It is needed before the Territory can become a State.
What would you put in (firearms related) if you could have some input?
What would you want kept out (anti gun)?
 
Last edited:
W

wally626

New member
That a well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state, therefore, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty; and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.
Click to expand...

This is the Commonwealth of Virginia Gun Clause.

Since the militia preambles have often caused issues with the US second admenment, I might change it to

The body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state, therefore, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed
Click to expand...
 
R

rwilson452

New member
From the PA constitution

"The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State shall not be questioned."
 
S

SKULLANDCROSSBONES65

New member
G'day. I've been thinking that these could 'sound to American', as much as I like the concept.

wally626 I like this one you had with one changed word.

The body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state, therefore, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be encroached


Here is a link to a website if anyone wants more information.
 
Last edited:
H

HarrySchell

New member
I dunno how to work it in, but anything referring to a "body of people" opens the door to those who want to sell the collective rights idea. The first point to make is the right is individual, not collective, and that the militia is formed from individuals.

I think I would reverse the language, along something like this:

"The right of an individual to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. This individual right is to secure the self-defense of liberty, person and property, or, by an assembly of individuals the defense of this free state or subdivisions thereof, against threats small or large, local or foreign."
 
J

johnwilliamson062

Moderator
I said to use the word individual somehow b/c I agree leaving it out is going to lead to a mess just as it has in the US.
The body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state, therefore, the right of the people, as individuals, to keep and bear arms shall not be encroached.
Click to expand...
Specifying the type of arms may not be a bad idea. you don't want to run into the "hunting arms" argument.
 
S

svaz

New member
G'day. I've been thinking that these could 'sound to American', as much as I like the concept.
Click to expand...
... anything referring to a "body of people" opens the door to those who want to sell the collective rights idea.
Click to expand...

I've just read a bit of the Aussie federal Constitution (the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act) and I can't find anything that protects individual rights. Actually, to me anyway, everything seemed gear towards granting/prohibiting collective rights with a few exceptions (section 118, for example).

Indeed, Wikipedia states, "The Australian Constitution does not include a Bill of Rights. Some delegates to the 1898 Constitutional Convention favoured a section similar to the Bill of Rights of the United States Constitution, but the majority felt that the traditional rights and freedoms of British subjects were sufficiently guaranteed by the Parliamentary system and independent judiciary which the Constitution would create."

Given that, how about:

The Commonwealth shall not make any law prohibiting the body of the people to keep and bear arms for the purposes of sport, self defense, and defense of the State.

or maybe,

A subject of the Queen, resident in this State, shall not be debarred the use and possession of arms for the purposes of sport, self defense, and defense of the State.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top