Letters to the Editor
Xanthro
Published Letters: 522 Editor's Choice: 47
-
Let's examine context
[Read the article: White House and guns: Stay the course]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"It's take a twisted logic to conclude that "the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" somehow means something other than the people. Xanthro"
Lets try the whole amendment, shall we?
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.
See that first clause? That's what we call "context". Lets try taking other amendments out of context.
----------------------------------
That's not context, it's a subordinate clause, the purpose of which is to provide why a right was enshrined into the Constitution.
If the framers wanted to limit the right to bear arms to the militia, then the wording would have been "A well regulated Militia's right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" but the Second Amendment doesn't read that way.
All males were originally part of the Militia by law, and all males under 45 are still part of the Militia by law, but the Amendment has nothing to do directly with a Militia, it pertains to bearing arms that contribute to a well regulated militia and that's a specific term that has a specfic meaning.
Others try to claim that the Second Amendment means any weapons can be kept, which is not true, only those weapons that contribute to the ability of an individual to fulfil duties in a well regulated militia.
If part of the Bill of Rights read, "A well educated population, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and read books shall not be infringed" would not limit books to only well educated people. The purpose would be to encourage a well educated populace.
In the same manner, the Second Amendment is to encourage a well regulated milita, but it in no way is limited to a well regulated militia.
In no other part of the Constitution does anyone try and argue that People means anything other than People. That's because such an argument is inherently wrong, and it's just as wrong in the case of the Second Amendment.
-
If only Cops had guns
[Read the article: Gun control or "hopes and prayers"?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I've never shot a gun in my life. But so what? I understand that they can be handled safely and are handled safely by the majority of users. That doesn't change what their purpose is. Guns are made to kill things. That's what the first gun was made for, and what every subsequent gun was made for.
And particularly insidious are the guns made for the purpose of shooting as quickly as possible. Those guns are made, not just to kill things, but to kill people. Cops should have them. Why should anyone else?
----------------------------------------------
Limiting firearms to cops and military only is by definition a police state.
Government as a whole can claim it's power based on two mutually exclusive prinicples, either the power comes from the electorate, or it is inherent in the State. The latter can be ruled by Kings, Dictators, or even a kind Ceaser, but it is still not free.
Our system of Government claims that all power rests with the people, so if people cannot own firearms from where does the government gain such a power?
Many Americans suffer from Uniform syndrom, where someone in a uniform is automatically considered just good and worthy of something that others are not. Police officers as a whole do not have better firearm training than most of your average shooters. I know, I train both.
Many times those armed security guards you see have almost no training, but look at that spiffy uniform, so people just think it's ok.
Then there is the entire stupid argument that all firearms are made only for killing, when whole classes of firearms are horrible at actual killing. Most match class firearms are designed for a specific purpose and that purpose often reduces their lethality, because being lethal doesn't contribute to their design. The most accurate firearms used in competition are meant to punch tiny holes in paper, killing something isn't even a hint of a thought in their design. You don't want more power because the recoil affects aim.