Squashed

A blog of politics, law, religion, and the tricky spots where they collide.

Questions? Contact.

Guns and the Constitution

We’re all familiar with the language of the 2nd Amendment:

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.

Needless to say, there is some question as to how we interpret that today. After all, we interpret “freedom of speech” in the 1st Amendment to include types of communication that didn’t exist when the text was written. Is there any logical check on the 2nd Amendment?

How about these clauses from Article I s. 8 in the actual body of the Constitution listing things that Congress shall have the power to do:

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress

At the time the Constitution was drafted, a standing army was not envisioned. Instead “the Militia” was going to suppress insurrections and repel invasions. In other words, the “militia” looks a whole lot like a National Guard. And we’re sort of ignoring that army appropriation thing. The Army has more or less taken over the role intended by the militia.

The idea that the well regulated Militia was intended to be a safeguard against tyranny is fantasy. In the Constitution, the Militia suppresses the insurrection. The text of the Constitution doesn’t support an unlimited right to private arms for private purposes.

  1. lystra reblogged this from squashed
  2. ismaelsobek reblogged this from squashed and added:
    “We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy, as civilized society to remain ever...
  3. mediocre-minds reblogged this from cellarghosts
  4. cellarghosts reblogged this from greekinevitability
  5. zigziggityzoo said: It’s also important to note that the Supreme Court has already disagreed with you - As I’m sure you know.
  6. fghtffyrdmnsncl reblogged this from cellarghosts
  7. surefinewhateverrr reblogged this from jessicachastains
  8. backstagebethy reblogged this from surefinewhateverrr
  9. inappropriateapplause reblogged this from squashed
  10. theyretakingover reblogged this from greekinevitability
  11. doodlebug99 reblogged this from squashed
  12. jessicachastains reblogged this from greekinevitability
  13. passiveaggressivepositivity reblogged this from squashed and added:
    (emphasis mine.) EXACTLY.
  14. greekinevitability reblogged this from squashed
  15. squashed posted this