Friday, May 04, 2007

The Intent of the Framers

No one questioned the reasons or need for private ownership of firearms when the Founding Fathers drafted the Second Amendment. ... The Framers were passionately devoted to the idea that an armed citizenry is self-sufficient and is also one of the best ways to ensure that freedom can be preserved from one generation to the next.
Nice words, Sandy. So when is NRA going to reverse its position that no one should have a gun on school campuses except law enforcement and security personnel? Or would those "passionate Framers" have agreed with you and Wayne that these should be citizen disarmament zones?

[Via KABA Newslinks]

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

"To paraphrase from my previous column, there are two main conflicting views of the Second Amendment: the individual rights view and the collective rights view. Those who hold the former say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear arms to every law-abiding and peaceable individual American citizen. Those who hold the latter say the Second Amendment does nothing more than give state governments the power to equip National Guard units. The gun debate in America revolves around which of these two views is correct.

But who decides which view is correct? Only the courts have the power to do that."

WRONG ANSWER!!!

The answer was bought with Patriots blood. They gave that answer to the British. The answer hasn't changed...only the questions.

Turn in your badges! Tell the NRA that they are no longer needed. Tell them that their six-figure salaries are over. Go get a real job.

The NRA has been instrumental in formulating gun control laws since 1934.

The NRA needs the debate to continue. They need the problem to continue. Most of all, they need more money.

They have become like the Feds with poverty. They have become like Jesse Jackson with racism. Without a problem, we have to go get a real job.

Anonymous said...

[would those "passionate Framers" have agreed with you and Wayne that these should be citizen disarmament zones?]


No, but P.T. Barnum would have.

Anonymous said...

Two points:

1) there is no such thing as "collective" rights. Rights accrue to individuals, only. They are not transferable, nor are they cumulative.

2) I wonder if there are any examples of citizens going about armed at schools at the time of the Rev War. Perhaps it was so commonplace that it wasn't deemed noteworthy enough to mention.