Apparently that is the opinion of Lee Gaillard who wrote an op ed piece in the Seattle Times stating such. Actually he states that "public safety" should trump the outdated 2nd amendment and he cites the upcoming Supreme Court case which will decide if the ban on handguns in Washington D.C. is constitutional. Washington D.C. has the strictest gun laws in the country and a murder rate 3.5 times higher than any state in the country. It is almost as if criminals know in advance that their victims will be unarmed.
But that lack of logic is not good enough for Mr. Galliard. He goes on to state:
The nine justices should hone their grammar skills. The introductory absolute phrase ("A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State,") preceding the main clause sets the condition for why the people collectively had a right to keep and bear arms: to be able quickly to muster their local "well regulated Militia," individually lifting smoothbores down from over their fireplaces so they could assemble and march off to defend "the security of [their] free State" against aggressors
Um.. no, what you call an introductory absolute phrase that is a condition of the main clause is a dependent clause that serves as a justification for the main clause, but does not limit the main clause. If being part of a militia was a condition, then the wording of the main clause would not be the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Instead it would need to be the right of the people who are part of a militia to keep and bears arms shall not be infringed.
3 comments:
I wonder what it means tat there are no comments here.
I've thought about commenting but don't have much to add except to say "No, it is not outdated. Mis-treated, but not outdated."
I do wonder how many more Von Maurs and Virginia Techs it will take before we start to deal with what may be a real problem--the indoctrination of people via violent movies, violent television, and violent games.
We are taught that vicious use of fire power solves all problems that taking a pill won't handle, while at the same time not showing kids that when you shoot something (as in hunting) it dies and does not come back when you hit "reset".
Those comments just make my skin crawl. You need some serious waders there.
I'm sending some traffic your way.
If you've not read Toobin's "The Nine" describing the supremes and how they have thought about the Constitution over the last 60 years, then you may not understand why people write things like this op ed.
Sandra Day O'Connor tried to keep her rulings consistent with current American trends. Op eds like this can influence the Justices if they believe that is how America believes.
Comments to these pieces is not enough, counter opinions need to be published. And, of course, every qualified American should own and carry a weapon when reasonable.
Post a Comment