I was out browsing the usual blogs today when I found a very good article discussing constitutional rights vs. privileges etc. It was obviously written by a person of Liberal bent. It was well written and I found the information interesting but a bit confusing in the way laws can be when the details are committed to paper. But as I was reading, something kept nagging at me and I finally realized what it was and articulated my concern to the blogger. My concern was his wording of the second amendment to the Constitution.
“state militia to bear arms” (Second Amendment)
The actual wording is:
“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”
My political opinions run pretty far left and I see this kind of perversion of this amendment frequently; usually from the Left. Not my left but most people’s.
So I commented to him and with the full intention of posting it here as well as follows:………………………….
I am not familiar with you or your credentials but I do know that the quotation I have sited is from the US government web site
One of the things I find so reprehensible about the Tea Party and other Conservatives is their tendency to twist things around to look as though their position is stronger than it is. When that twisting comes from the Liberal side; it makes me wonder if either party really knows what the hell their about.
Your per “version” of the text of this amendment is just such an act. I don’t mind that you disagree with me.
I don’t even mind that you insist on “interpreting” the Constitution rather than accepting it as written.
But I do mind and I think it undignified to change the words of a historical document of such import to the American people to make it look as though the Constitution supports the idea that a government sponsored Militia are the only persons with the right to bear arms when the actual text says clearly the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
This is a scary idea I know especially for those who don’t use or want guns. But the fact that one person finds the idea of millions of Americans armed frightening, doesn’t change the wording or intent of the Constitution as written.
I fail to understand how a Liberal can say he’s a Liberal and yet be in opposition to the right to bear arms. It is obvious from the unadulterated amendment that the intention was for the citizens to bear arms to keep their state free. State as in Maryland, Virginia, not the larger sense of a nation. The people were assured this right in order to be able to defend themselves from invasion by a foreign country or by the federal government. Militias were not standing troops attached to the federal government or the army. They kept their weapons at home and were counted on to defend the colony or state.
The National Guard is not the same thing. It is far too much under the control of the government both federal and state.
The Government likes the National Guard.
The Government doesn’t like Militias because they fall outside the control of the Government chain of command.
That’s why we should like Militias.
But we can’t like an organized militia.
They pose a danger. The only time you hear the word anymore is in connection with some radical right wing fringe group holed up in a cave in the Cascades or something but the real beauty is that because we have the right to keep and bear arms, that same capability remains intact. We don’t need an organized Militia. We just need a free people, well armed and willing to take the stand when our freedom is threatened…….by anyone.
It is interesting that the only Liberal position taken by the Conservative party is the right to bear arms.
Could it be that what they hope for is a well armed Tea Party and an unarmed Liberal Party? Just a thought.
And that the one right the liberals don’t seem to be willing to support is the right to bear arms.
But I submit that defense of that right is a Liberal, not a Conservative stance.
Liberals are the ones who seek to assure the people their rights.
Conservatives seek to take those rights away. Except in this case.
In this case the Conservatives are the defenders of the people’s rights and the Liberals are bent on finding any deceitful way they can to “interpret” the Constitution and use it to deny the people their rights
I find that very strange. Mind-Boggling actually.
My opinions run so far left that I make Democrats look like Fascists.
I support the right of every American to own and carry openly a firearm of their choice.
Just as I support their right to peaceably assemble; recognizing that such an assembly can turn violent at a moment’s notice.
The assembly is not the crime. The violence is.
We have a right, recognized and guaranteed by the Constitution to assemble.
Carrying a gun is not the crime. Shooting someone with it, other than in self defense is.
We have a right recognized and guaranteed by the Constitution to keep and bear arms.
I would feel hypocritical indeed if I defended a person’s right to speak freely or chose their own religion or smoke marijuana or have multiple spouses or commit suicide, but did not defend their equal and clearly stated right to keep and carry. And I do support all of those things. Freedom is “FREEDOM” not “FREEDOM except when I don’t like it”.
I tell my conservative friends, many of whom are conservatives because of this issue and only because of this issue; that the conservatives only support the right to bear arms to get the money and votes that come with the Gun Lobby. That they, as supporters of this right are not really Conservatives but have been fooled into thinking they are because of the Liberals refusal to take this cause on and the Conservatives willingness to do so as though supporting this one, of the peoples many rights makes them the peoples champion.
I think by not supporting this very basic right of the American people we have missed out on a huge amount of support for our other positions. And we should have that support not because we falsely cultivate it but because we genuinely support the rights of gun owners just as vigorously as we defend and support the rights of people who wish to speak their unpopular opinions or build a Mosque or burn the flag or any of the other things that have often been the victim of the Conservative Parties Quasi-Fascist Agenda.
You can’t support the rights you find particularly attractive, and not support the ones I feel are particularly attractive.
It’s all or nothing. You’re on the bus or off the bus. For the people’s rights or against them. Eating the whole biscuit or not taking a bite. In for the Pound or keep your bleeding Penny.
You can’t be a halfway Liberal and expect respect from anyone; Liberals, Conservatives, or Confused-atives.