4. The second amendment doesn't guarantee individual rights to self defense, only those in military service can bear arms.
This falsehood is based on articles like this one in the NY Time, which says “Most federal appeals courts have said that the amendment read as a whole protects only a collective right of the states to maintain militias.” But appeals courts are not infallible.
The second amendment reads:
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 whole controversy rests on whether the first phrase constrains the second to refer only to states' militias. Before we get into the law and history involved, let's try a little experiment. Replace the “controversial” terms with equivalent “neutral” terms and see how a reasonable person would interpret it.
A well educated electorate being
necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to
keep and read books shall not be
infringed.
So, in the above statement, who has the right to keep and read books? Registered voters, or the people? It is pretty clear that the first phrase merely defines the purpose for the statement, not a limitation. The Supreme court agrees. In D.C. v. Heller the majority opinion states:
The
Second Amendment is naturally divided into two parts: its prefatory
clause and its operative clause. The former does not limit the latter
grammatically, but rather announces a purpose. The Amendment could be
rephrased, "Because a well regulated Militia is necessary to the
security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear
Arms shall not be infringed."
The Bill of Rights contains two other amendments which use the phrase “the right of the people.” In both cases the phrase refers to an individual right.
Amendment
1: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of
religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the
freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people
peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress
of grievances."
Amendment
4: "The right of the people to be secure in their
persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches
and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but
upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and
particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or
things to be seized."
Furthermore a grammatical analysis of the second amendment reveals
"The
words 'A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a
free state,'... constitutes a present participle, rather than a
clause. It is used as an adjective, modifying 'militia,' which is
followed by the main clause of the sentence (subject 'the right',
verb 'shall').
The to keep and bear arms is asserted as an essential
for maintaining a militia.
"The sentence does not restrict
the right to keep and bear arms, nor does it state or imply
possession of the right elsewhere or by others than the people; it
simply makes a positive statement with respect to a right of the
people."
We can also look at the founders and framers of the Constitution to see what they said relevant to the second amendment.
George
Mason said “I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole
people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual
way to enslave them.” (Speech
in the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 14, 1778).
Richard
Henry Lee said “A
militia when properly formed are in fact the people themselves… and
include all men capable of bearing arms... To preserve liberty it is
essential that the whole body of people always possess arms… The
mind that aims at a select militia, must be influenced by a truly
anti-republican principle.” (Letters
From the Federal Farmer to the Republican,
Letter XVIII, January 25, 1788)
Samuel
Adams said “And that the said Constitution be never construed to
authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the
rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States,
who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms...”
(Debates of the Massachusetts Convention of February 6, 1788)
Thomas
Jefferson wrote “False
is the idea of utility that sacrifices a thousand real advantages for
one imaginary or trifling inconvenience; that would take fire from
men because it burns, and water because one may drown in it; that has
no remedy for evils, except destruction. Laws that forbid the
carrying of arms laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who
are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.… Such laws
make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants;
they act rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an
unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed
man.” (Quoting
Cesare Beccaria, On
Crimes and Punishment)
He
also wrote “A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species
of exercise, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to
the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind.
Games played with the ball and others of that nature are too violent
for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun
therefore be the constant companion of your walks.” (Letter to
Peter Carr, 178)
Thomas
Paine wrote “The supposed quietude of a good man allures the
ruffian; while on the other hand, arms like laws discourage and keep
the invader and the plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world
as well as property. The balance of power is the scale of peace. The
same balance would be preserved were all the world destitute of arms,
for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay
them aside. And while a single nation refuses to lay them down, it is
proper that all should keep them up. Horrid mischief would ensue were
one half the world deprived of the use of them.” (Thoughts on
Defensive War, 1775)
Realize that the second amendment, while it affirms the natural right to self defense, states explicitly that the people have the right to defend themselves and their community against not only criminals, but armies, both foreign and domestic. Therefore such things as “assault weapons” bans are unconstitutional. The quotes around “assault weapons” are because the weapons banned by these laws are, according to the federal government's own definitions not assault weapons. In fact, when the federal government buys more powerful, more deadly versions of these firearms, they call them “personal defense weapons” or PDWs.
To summarize:
-
The founders of our country considered the second amendment to be an individual right.
-
A grammatical analysis of the second amendment affirms it to be referring to an individual right.
-
The Supreme Court has affirmed multiple times that the right to keep and bear arms is an individual right.
Posts
0 comments:
Post a Comment