jump to navigation


Posted by wmmbb in US Politics.

So as a matter of interest, what does the Second Amendment actually say? (And, if the Australian Constitution is any guide, how has, and how might, the Supreme Court interpret it?)

Allowing potentially deranged people along with otherwise sane people to buy automatic weapons to kill others, even if the pretext is self defence, is insanity. Here is the Second Amendment:

“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.”

What then is a militia? Has the meaning changed in substance since The Militia Act 1792? When in recent times have citizens of the United States, consistent with the Second Amendment, been called upon to present themselves with their weapons for public good? The answer to this question is never and it is not remotely likely to happen.

Harvey Wasserman is on the case:

The Second Amendment supports those of us who would CONTROL guns—and thus prevent the insane slaughter that compromises our security.

James Madison and the Founders of this nation would be enraged to see the Second Amendment being used to put guns in the hands of the Tucson shooter and so many others like him.
. . .

The Bill of Rights is the law of the land, clearly stated. Guarantees of religion, speech, assembly, the press, freedom from torture and so much more are natural rights, inherent to the human condition.

But the right to bear arms is granted only in the context of a well-regulated militia and thus the security of a free state.

A National Guard, yes. Heavily-armed lunatics roaming the streets unregulated? Never.

Now all he has to do is to convince the Supreme Court – and the National Rifle Association.



1. YJ Draiman for council - January 20, 2011

We have the Constitutional Right to Bear Arms and Defend Ourselves – 2nd Amendment

“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.

It is a right not a privilege, just like you have the right to live and breath.

Right to Bear Arms is an unalienable right; it cannot be given to someone by someone else, they already have it at birth, and thus, it cannot be taken away no matter how good the reason seems to be.

“Do not punish or deny the rights of the masses for the sins of the few”

This applies to any and all rights and privileges stated in the Constitution of the United States.

The Second Amendment is one of our most cherished. The right to keep and bear arms is what keeps government subservient to its citizenry. Without the right to bear arms, we would have anarchy in the streets, the criminals would still have guns, and violent crime would escalate.

Thomas Paine: “Arms, like laws, discourage and keep the invader and the plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property.” We plan on exercising these rights to the fullest extent of the Constitutional Law.

Our society today is brainwashed that when some people abuse their constitutional rights we must punish all of society and revoke that right and privilege.

When some one uses a weapon, any weapon, gun, knife, pick, ax, saw, car, etc. they get prosecuted, when convicted, they are sentenced not all the people of the country.

Abuse by some people has been going on since creation and will continue till the end of time. We must control and punish the abusers, not the whole society.

Case and point is the punishment society is taking today due to terrorism. Since governments are helpless to fight and control terrorism they punish the masses in the name of safety and cause extreme economic hardship and the loss of our constitutional liberties.

There are Nations that under their Laws citizens are permitted to posses firearms. Check out some of those countries. Crime rate has not increased. Abuses happen, the abusers are punished and not the rest of society.

It is a known historical fact that the Criminal will always find a way to get a weapon.

Restricting the average citizen from having a weapon to protect himself and his family, leaves the door open to the criminal to violate those citizens, due to the knowledge that the average citizen has no weapon and cannot protect himself and his family.

A weapon is a tool like any other tool and should be used properly.

A knife, pick, ax, saw, car, etc. is also a tool that must be used properly. It is not outlawed, is it?

A car in today’s society is an absolute must. Do the citizens of this country know how many people are killed and injured by automobiles every year, it amounts to thousands, which is much less than with guns.

And to those who would say this was but a “temporary violation” for the greater good, Ben Franklin admonishes;


Folks, we live in dangerous times, a government that does not trust its citizens to bear arms, is a government not to be trusted by its citizens.

As the threat to all of our liberties continue basically unabated, remember the words of the great political philosopher Edmund Burke; “The only way for evil men to prosper is for good men to do nothing.”

The right to keep and bear arms should be of great importance to all Americans, if we are to remain a free country we MUST NOT let this right be taken from us Remember, freedom isn’t free. God Bless you, and God, please bless the United States of America.

By: YJ Draiman, Northridge, CA

PS The Supreme Court ruled on the Heller case at the end of its term in June, 2008. The Court, which found for Heller in a close 5-4 decision, wrote that the 2nd Amendment did, in fact, protect an individual right. While the court was careful to note that the case did not call into question any laws that regulate guns, it did state, unequivocally, that Heller and his fellow petitioners had a right to own guns in their home. The Court also ruled that while reasonable regulation may be permitted, the requirement that guns be locked and disassembled was not reasonable.

Supreme Court affirms fundamental right to bear arms Tuesday, June 29, 2010; MCDONALD v. CHICAGO Syllabus The Fourteenth Amendment incorporates the Second Amendment right, recognized in Heller, to keep and bear arms for the purpose of self defense. Pp. 5–9, 11–19, 19–33. The Second Amendment provides Americans a fundamental right to bear arms that cannot be violated by state and local governments, the Supreme Court ruled Monday in a long-sought victory for gun rights advocates. The 5 to 4 decision does not strike down any gun-control laws, nor does it elaborate on what kind of laws would offend the Constitution. One justice predicted that an “avalanche” of lawsuits would be filed across the country asking federal judges to define the boundaries of gun ownership and government regulation. But Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., who wrote the opinion for the court’s dominant conservatives, said: “It is clear that the Framers … counted the right to keep and bear arms among those fundamental rights necessary to our system of ordered liberty.” The decision extended the court’s 2008 ruling in District of Columbia v. Heller that “the Second Amendment protects a personal right to keep and bear arms for lawful purposes, most notably for self-defense within the home.” That decision applied only to federal laws and federal enclaves such as Washington; it was the first time the court had said there was an individual right to gun ownership rather than one related to military service.

wmmbb - January 20, 2011

Thanks for your comments. They are interesting. I was unaware of the relevant court judgments.

I tend to think the right not to have arms and not be caught up in the arms escalation that accompanies it represents a more fundamental and important right.

In its essence this represents an argument about violence – the right to self defence. Unfortunately, there are some people that any rational person has cause to believe that have guns as they are violent enough as it is.

As it is there are a number of organized militias around the place presumably serving the public interest and the common good which makes the 2nd Amendment premise redundant.

Still other rights – other than the implied right to kill other people – are more important, such as habeas corpus which is seen in the Brad Manning case has been honoured in the breach.

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 )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: