The Second Amendment, when read as written, guarantees a well regulated Militia (not the right to bear…

by Ernie Hernandez on December 16, 2012

The Second Amendment, when read as written, guarantees a well regulated Militia (not the right to bear arms as most believe).

The Second Amendment reads as follows when read properly, “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.” The bold portion is an independent clause. The strikethrough clauses are dependent clauses – that is – they can not stand alone. The right to bear arms supports the militia.

(Second Amendment language directly from the government archives (found here))

Merriam Webster dictionary defines a militia as:

1 : a part of the organized armed forces of a country liable to call only in emergency
b: a body of citizens organized for military service
2 : the whole body of able-bodied male citizens declared by law as being subject to call to military service

So – the Second Amendment states that a well regulated Militia shall not be infringed. The Militia was necessary to the security of a free State. The Militia afforded the right of the people to keep and bear arms.

One could argue that in 1791, there may have been a strong need for a Militia. One could also argue that in 2012 such is no longer the case as the National Guard has become our modern day Militia.

http://www.nationalguard.mil/about/

Be that as it may, some in this country argue that they have a Constitutional right to bear arms. The question not answered by the Second Amendment is what kind of arms. It is up to the citizens of our country to make that determination, via our elected representatives. It is time for the silent majority to speak up.

According the United States Census latest information, the population of the United States is over 300 million.

http://www.census.gov/main/www/popclock.html

According the the National Rifle Association’s (NRA) lobbying arm, the Institute for Legislative Action, the NRA has nearly 4 million members.

http://www.nraila.org/about-nra-ila.aspx

According to a poll of 945 gun owners taken in May of this year (half NRA members or ex-members), there is a rift in support of common sense gun laws between NRA rank-and-file and their leadership.

http://www.mayorsagainstillegalguns.org/html/media-center/pr006-12.shtml

It is time for the silent majority to speak up – loudly – to our elected representatives.

The Second Amendment does not define what Arms are. The NRA has proposed that Arms include handguns and semi-automatic weapons because they are bearable. Handguns and semi-automatic weapons exist for one purpose. To kill people. Sportsmen own rifles and shotguns for killing animals. Handguns and semi-automatic weapons are not necessary for the killing of animals. Neither are fully automatic weapons, grenades, nor rocket propelled grenades. These are also bearable Arms. Yet our citizens are not allowed to own fully automatic weapons, grenades, nor rocket propelled grenades. Arguably, these are bearable arms. A line has already been drawn about the legality of certain weapons. We do not need a new line. We need to move the one that we’ve got.

Were other factors at play in the tragedy in Connecticut? Yes there were. The fact remains – if these guns were not readily (and legally) available in this home, this tragic multiple killing could not have happened in the way that it did.

{ 0 comments… add one now }

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: