Bob Livingston, You are guilty, as are the NRA, the NAGR, all pro-gun organizations, and all American gun lovers, of interpreting the 2nd Amendment to fit your agenda. All of you forget that it was written over 200 years ago FOR MEMBERS OF MILITIAS AS THEY EXISTED BACK THEN. THE 2ND AMENDMENT DOES NOT GIVE YOU AND OTHERS LIKE YOU THE RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS. All of you are making believe that the first few words of the 2nd Amendment do not exist. BUT, THEY DO -“A WELL REGULATED MILITIA…”. Actually, you all should read the 2nd Amendment again. And, don’t give me that crap about the Supreme Court interpreting the 2nd Amendment your way. They have been wrong a few times in the last few years (ever since they became an arm of the Republican and tea parties).
If you would, please reply to this. Yet, like the rest of the pro-gun backers, you are probably afraid to reply because you know I’m right.
Frank L Duley
Dear Frank L Duley,
You write: “You are guilty … and all American gun lovers, of interpreting the 2nd Amendment to fit your agenda.” It needs no interpretation. Like all of the Constitution, it is quite clear and easy to understand. And given that my “agenda” is liberty and Constitutional governance, there is no confusion about supporting it or abiding by it.
You write: “All of you forget that it was written over 200 years ago FOR MEMBERS OF MILITIAS AS THEY EXISTED BACK THEN.” I have not forgotten when the Constitution was written, but you are partially correct. Tench Coxe described the militia this way: “Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom? Congress shall have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American … The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the People.” In a speech at the Virginia Ratifying Convention, 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.” “A militia when properly formed are in fact the people themselves … and include… all men capable of bearing arms. … The mind that aims at a select militia, must be influenced by a truly anti-republican principle,” wrote Richard Lee as the Federal Farmer. The Militia Act of 1792 defines the militia as all able bodied men ages 18 to 45. Further, it requires all of them to provide their own arms and ammunition, which were the military weapons of the day. The fact that the U.S. government, against the advice of the Founders, has created a standing army does not negate the fact that militias can and do still exist and that every American still has the right to “keep and bear arms.”
You write: “THE 2ND AMENDMENT DOES NOT GIVE YOU AND OTHERS LIKE YOU THE RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS.” You are correct. Government does not give me any rights. My rights — and yours — come from God. God gives me and others like me the right to keep and bear arms. The 2nd Amendment was established to restrict government from infringing on that right.
You write: “All of you are making believe that the first few words of the 2nd Amendment do not exist. BUT, THEY DO -“A WELL REGULATED MILITIA…” I cannot speak for others that make up your “all of you,” but as for myself, I have never believed or stated that the first few words of the 2nd Amendment do not exist. The difference between you and me is that I understand what the Founders meant by “well regulated Militia.” According to “An American Dictionary of the English Language, Vol. II” by Noah Webster, published in 1828, the definition of “regulated” is this: “adjusted by rule, method or forms, put in good order, subjected to rules or restrictions.” The “Random House College Dictionary” (1980) gives one more definition dating from 1690 and relating to troops: “properly disciplined.” So well regulated, to the Founders, meant a group of troops put in good order and properly disciplined. It is curious, however, that while you accuse me of ignoring the opening clause of the Amendment, you willfully ignore the closing one: “…shall not be infringed.”
You write: “Actually, you all should read the 2nd Amendment again.” Done. It says the same thing it said the last time I read it, and every other time before that. It is quite clear.
You write: “And, don’t give me that crap about the Supreme Court interpreting the 2nd Amendment your way. They have been wrong a few times in the last few years (ever since they became an arm of the Republican and tea parties).” The Supreme Court is an arm of government and corporations and, as such, rules on behalf of government and corporations. If you believe otherwise, you are delusional.
You write: “If you would, please reply to this. Yet, like the rest of the pro-gun backers, you are probably afraid to reply because you know I’m right.” You are wrong on both counts: I am not “afraid to reply,” nor are you “right.” These two links (here and here) should set you aright, if you are willing to be honest.
Best wishes,
Bob