Re: Interpreting the Second Amendment

"Patriot Games" <Crazy_***@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in
RpuPh.486$i93.295@trnddc05:">news:RpuPh.486$i93.295@trnddc05:

Subject: Interpreting the Second Amendment
From: "Patriot Games" <Crazy_***@xxxxxxxxx>
Newsgroups: alt.politics

http://frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=27587

Interpreting the Second Amendment
By Barry Loberfeld
FrontPageMagazine.com | March 30, 2007



Nonsense.

The Second Amendment exists to ensure the military forces of the United
States comprise common citizens not professional soldiers. A military of
professionals, a "standing army" in the usage of the time, is a danger to
liberty but a military of common citizens, a militia, is a tool of free
men.

The problem comes from the definition of militia. Is it merely a bunch
of guys with their own guns or is it citizens called to arms? See
Machiavelli's "The Prince" for a discussion of militias. Clearly, the
defining attribute of a militia is the nature of its members not the
ownership of their arms. The Second Amendment guarantees the sovereign,
the people, will control the membership. It has nothing to do with guns.
.

Quantcast