A Well Regulated Militia Being Necessary to the Security of a Free State

Lawrence A Winans

I am a gun-owner and have been for years. I’ve been a member of the local Civilian Marksmanship Program (CMP). The CMP was established by the Defense Department to promote the training of civilians in the proper use of firearms in case of a national emergency. Although not a hunter I enjoy the sport of marksmanship. I’ve also read case law developing the meaning and application of the Second Amendment.

The National Rifle Association (NRA) does not represent me.

President Obama and Vice President Biden have developed a reasonable set of proposals which do not violate the rights of gunowners but do make an effort to reduce the sort of violence we repeatedly see on the news. The NRA’s irrational rejection of anything in the nature of gun regulation does not protect the constitutional rights of lawful gunowners but rather violates the rights to life and liberty held by schoolchildren and the other victims of gun violence.

The key word here is “regulation”. The Second Amendment* does not grant an absolute right to own and use firearms. It recognizes the need to maintain an armed populace which may be assembled as a militia for the defense of the country. The Amendment states clearly that there is a need for a “well regulated militia” and the right of gunownership is predicated upon that need.

The Constitution does not protect any would-be right to kill people, to buy guns secretly and without recordation, to maintain firepower exceeding that of many small nations, to load “cop-killing” bullets, or to possess weaponry of mass destruction.

We here at the DISSENTING DEMOCRAT are not in the tank for Obama but on this issue he speaks for the Nation. This is not a conservative or liberal issue, it is sanity versus insanity. We hope Congress chooses sanity.

______________________________________________

* The Second Amendment reads as follows:

“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.”

One response to “A Well Regulated Militia Being Necessary to the Security of a Free State

  1. Good points. Not to mention there isn’t even any evidence suggesting that high gun-ownership rights lead to populaces that are more capable of protecting themselves against their governments. If you look at the Small Arms Survey’s International rankings from 2007, Tunisia ranked last and was able to overthrow its government recently, whereas Bahrain’s well-armed populace failed to unseat their government in a popular revolution.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s