Comments on: Are Our Second Amendment Rights Hanging On A Comma? http://www.bloggernews.net/111593 High-quality English language analysis and editorial writing on the news. Fri, 04 Jul 2008 22:02:31 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3 By: James Macklin http://www.bloggernews.net/111593#comment-123785 James Macklin Sun, 11 Nov 2007 17:23:57 +0000 http://www.bloggernews.net/111593#comment-123785 The Senate amended the the text of what was ratified later as the Second Amendment. The original had one comma and was published for over 150 years in textbooks with one comma. The older editions of books, such as the World Book Encyclopedia and the Brittanica printed in the 1950s all use one comma. But somewhere in the 1960s, the government started to use the three comma version. It is troubling that most of the original copies of the Bill of Rights are "missing" but it my understanding that the New York state's copy has only one comma. The wording, "keep and bear arms" was selected because of the events at Boston and Concord. The British Army was confiscating arms and that is why they marched to Concord and Lexington, to collect arms and stores held in centralized locations. When the original Constitytion was written, Congress had the power to organize, arm and disipline the militia, but that was not seen as adequate protection for the nation. The Bill of Rights was demanded to protect the rights of people. When the Framers spoke of rights, they always meant individuals people, when speaking of states, they used the powers. The Second Amendment thus is tied to the proposion that the people must be protected in their right to form a militia and that requires that the people be armed. "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." http://www.geocities.com/ks2ndamendmentsociety/toreadandunderstand.html The Senate amended the the text of what was ratified later as the Second Amendment. The original had one comma and was published for over 150 years in textbooks with one comma. The older editions of books, such as the World Book Encyclopedia and the Brittanica printed in the 1950s all use one comma. But somewhere in the 1960s, the government started to use the three comma version.
It is troubling that most of the original copies of the Bill of Rights are “missing” but it my understanding that the New York state’s copy has only one comma.
The wording, “keep and bear arms” was selected because of the events at Boston and Concord. The British Army was confiscating arms and that is why they marched to Concord and Lexington, to collect arms and stores held in centralized locations.
When the original Constitytion was written, Congress had the power to organize, arm and disipline the militia, but that was not seen as adequate protection for the nation. The Bill of Rights was demanded to protect the rights of people.
When the Framers spoke of rights, they always meant individuals people, when speaking of states, they used the powers.
The Second Amendment thus is tied to the proposion that the people must be protected in their right to form a militia and that requires that the people be armed.
“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.”
http://www.geocities.com/ks2ndamendmentsociety/toreadandunderstand.html

]]> By: The Stiletto http://www.bloggernews.net/111593#comment-122904 The Stiletto Sat, 10 Nov 2007 20:20:23 +0000 http://www.bloggernews.net/111593#comment-122904 Plus, back then there was no practical means of distributing arms to the citizenry should a national crisis necessitate formation of militias. It stands to reason, therefore, that militias would be formed from already armed people. I don't see why this isn't clear to everyone. Plus, back then there was no practical means of distributing arms to the citizenry should a national crisis necessitate formation of militias. It stands to reason, therefore, that militias would be formed from already armed people. I don’t see why this isn’t clear to everyone.

]]> By: Gondring http://www.bloggernews.net/111593#comment-122899 Gondring Sat, 10 Nov 2007 20:08:01 +0000 http://www.bloggernews.net/111593#comment-122899 It's not even clear that there IS a third comma. Look at the actual document, and the comma doesn't seem to be there...just a lead-in of the "s" in "shall"... Plus, if you go to the source of the amendment, it's pretty clear that "militia" referred to all the people...as George Mason himself (author of it) was asked, and he stated it clearly! But regardless, with the first clause being dependent, the subject is "the people." It’s not even clear that there IS a third comma. Look at the actual document, and the comma doesn’t seem to be there…just a lead-in of the “s” in “shall”…

Plus, if you go to the source of the amendment, it’s pretty clear that “militia” referred to all the people…as George Mason himself (author of it) was asked, and he stated it clearly! But regardless, with the first clause being dependent, the subject is “the people.”

]]>