||My Humble Opinion||
week passes in which I do not receive a nasty letter, or two,
from "Gun Fearing" liberals responding to my "Gun
page informing me, among other things, on what materials and
objects I may insert in various orifices and how this page is ultimate
proof of my lack of intellect because of my ignorant and uneducated,
false interpretation of the Second
Well, the Second Amendment seems to me as quite simple and straightforward. It 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.”
Nothing at all complicated or confusing about that, but then of course, I'm not a democrat. My critic’s arguments center around the words “the people” as not meaning you and me or my brother or mother, cousin, neighbor or any other “people” not actively employed by the military or law enforcement. “A well regulated Militia,” they say, ". . means the National Guard, not ordinary citizens, and any fool knows that!"
The National Guard traces it roots back to the colonies when they organized able-bodied men into militias to provide for their own defenses against raiders, Indian attacks and foreign invaders. Each colony had their own militias, "being necessary to the security of a free State," and years later, they joined to support the Revolutionary War. Following the 1898 Spanish-American War, which revealed the shortcomings of the State Militias, the Militia Act of 1903 reformed and reorganized the State Militias into federal status requiring them to conform to regular army rules, regulations, training and organization.
By the time they created the Second Amendment in 1791, the Colonial Militias had been around for 150 years. The Founding Fathers recognized and approved of their importance and with this Amendment insured their continuing existence without interference from the now present United States Army. Today’s State National Guard units are the survivors of the early Colonial Militias that received such special treatment in this Amendment.
Now, lets look at “the people.”
The Constitution contains two references to “the people.” The Bill of Rights contains five references to “the people” and Amendment XVII contains two references to “the people.” All total, nine times the Constitution mentions “the people.”
The first reference in the Constitution is in the opening preamble: (all BOLD emphasis is mine)
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Do you really believe the Founding Fathers were referring the National Guard? “We the People well regulated militia of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union . . . “ I don’t think so! They were referring to you and me and my brother, mother, cousin, neighbor and every other living soul in the land. Forget the National Guard and the Militia. “The people” means the people.
The second reference in the Constitution to “the people” can be found in Article I, Section 2:
The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States, and the Electors in each State shall have the Qualifications requisite for Electors of the most numerous Branch of the State Legislature.
Do you really believe the Founding Fathers were referring the National Guard? “The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the well regulated Militia of the several States . . . “ I don’t think so! They were referring to you and me and my brother, mother, cousin, neighbor and every other living soul in the land. Forget the National Guard and the Militia. “The People” means the people.
The Bill Of Rights contain five references:
Amendment I: “. . . . or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
Amendment II: “. . .the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Amendment IV: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated. . . . “
Amendment IX: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”
Amendment X: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
Amendment XVII contains two references:
“The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures.”
“When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct. “
If, in any of the references above, you remove “the people” and substitute “the militia” or “a well regulated militia” none of those Amendments would make any sense. And to argue that “the people” means “the people” in every instance except the Second Amendment, is incoherent and illogical.
Our Founding Fathers, there were some dissenters, intended and wanted well armed citizens and proof of this fact can be found in their personal writings, their professional writings while debating the Constitution and their actions during the formation of our country.
The Father of our Country - George Washington:
"Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself."
Father of our Constitution - James Madison:
You gun fearing liberals who wish the Second Amendment repealed and weapons removed from the hands of the citizenry, should at least consider just who in America is committing these gun related crimes, the possibilities of these criminals obeying the dis-armament of America, and the potential results should the courts apply severe penalties to these criminals by permanently removing them from society.
In any event, stop writing me. Your cries fall on deaf ears.
That's the way I see it.
Nation Visitors Since March 8, 2013