The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution 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.”
The NRA beats us over the head with this every chance they get. In the wake of this recent mass killing incident, I wanted to know why “We the people,” are being gunned down by the right of some of us to want to have an arsenal and use that arsenal to kill indiscriminately based on this Amendment. I was reading an article from Cornell University which dealt with what the Amendment means. It seems there are two major views.
“On the one hand, some believe that the Amendment’s phrase “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms” creates an individual constitutional right for citizens of the United States. Under this “individual right theory,” the United States Constitution restricts legislative bodies from prohibiting firearm possession, or at the very least, the Amendment renders prohibitory and restrictive regulation presumptively unconstitutional. On the other hand, some scholars point to the prefatory language “a well regulated Militia” to argue that the Framers intended only to restrict Congress from legislating away a state’s right to self-defense. Scholars have come to call this theory “the collective rights theory.” A collective rights theory of the Second Amendment asserts that citizens do not have an individual right to possess guns and that local, state, and federal legislative bodies therefore possess the authority to regulate firearms without implicating a constitutional right.”
Well, I got a third view. I call it the “Common Sense Theory” and its based on the phrase, “being necessary to the security of a free State.” At he time the Constitution was signed there were only 13 states. The vast majority of the United States was settled by Spain, France and Mexico with some unexplored areas. One of the principal concerns the delegates had was to preserve the independence and sovereignty of the states which had been written into the Articles of Confederations, the document binding the 13 states before the Constitution. The “free states,” wanted “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms” “because” it was necessary to their security.” They used the word “being” because they were writing the Constitution in the present tense. At that time and surrounded by that era’s super powers, they decided they had to protect their “security.” Which brings us up to today. It is no longer “necessary to the security of a free State.” All of our states are free. Now change the words “free States” to “United States,” or just put your states name where it say’s “free States,” because that’s what they are talking about, and see if it makes any sense to you. Oh yeah, and by the way, we got a well regulated Militia, it’s called the Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force and Coast Guard. “Being necessary to the security of a free State, ” is the “only reason” that puts weapons of mass casualty into anyone’s hands. Maybe our scholar’s should start focusing on if its necessary to the security of any “free State” in our union, to let their citizens be armed to the teeth for it’s security. Its time for common sense laws, not for the free States, but for the United States.