Posted on 11/10/2007 11:25:50 AM PST by theothercheek
Washington, D.C. Mayor Adrian M. Fenty made good on his vow to contest the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruling that the city’s 1976 handgun ban is unconstitutional, because the Second Amendment applies to individuals as well as to militias - and the Supreme Court is now considering whether to take up the issue of what the Founding Fathers meant by these words: "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."
Should the high court decide to grant review, Legal Times reports that its ruling may not hinge on the actual words comprising the Second Amendment, but to the commas that separate those words into clauses:
Another suddenly intense debate is enveloping the case - this one over what all those commas in the Second Amendment meant in late 18th-century America.
It may sound way beyond trivial, but it's not: The grammar war is under way.
You can blame the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit for igniting this esoteric debate. It ruled on March 9 that because of the Second Amendment's second comma, the first half of the amendment - the militia half - is basically a throat-clearing preface that does not qualify the individual right to bear arms that the second half protects.
Judge Laurence Silberman, who wrote the 2-1 decision, went on to conclude that the district's handgun ban violates that individual right.
Some grammarians believe that commas were often used to signal a breath pause for orators – which means there would be more of them than would be used today, and that they may not necessarily mean anything. Others argue that the commas divide the sentence into dependent and independent clauses – the trouble is there is sharp disagreement over which clause is dependent and which is independent.
Complicating matters even further the Second Amendment is a comma chameleon: The version that Congress approved in 1789 had three commas, while several states ratified a two-comma version.
The Stiletto shudders to think that her Second Amendment rights are dependent on the placement of a comma – especially considering what’s going on in Venezuela these days.
Note: The Stiletto writes about politics and other stuff at The Stiletto Blog.
A militia in good order, being necessary for the security of a free society, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
I can see the confusion. /s
In Pennsylvania, it’s “shall not be questioned”...but that doesn’t stop them!
My right to bear arms is constrained only by some fools willingness to come to my door to collect mine.
This is the one true talent of the left - splitting hairs (and communities). If you’ve engaged one of them on a blog that is advanced beyond pure vitriol, you’ve been witness to the hyper-parsing that they enjoy.
They live to slice those commas! No matter how clear and unambiguous a quote, a citation, or a statute is, they “discover” nuances in the language and exploit it to fracture the common understanding (see Roe v. Wade).
It happens every day and on every subject, and our most sacred traditions like the US Constitution is their greatest target with the 2nd Amendment being the holy grail.
They will never stop the assault so we must never stop our vigilance.
Good one!
Breaking the debate down to the meaning of commas is nothing but desperation by the gun grabbing liberals. All anyone has to do is read the writings of the Founders as well as the political thought of that era to know they believed in the sacred right of individuals to keep and bear arms.
The spacing of the words makes it seems that they did indeed goof and add an extraneous comma. But it is very difficult to confirm.
The best I could do under the ambient light, the handheld camera I had, and the press of the line behind me, is this...
Unfortunately, photobucket converts to a jpg, but I hope that it's clear that there's a gap, but the lead-in of the "s" in "shall" takes up much of that gap. Is there really a comma, or is that just the lead-in to the "s" character?
We must never concede on their assaults to our natural rights!
An ARMED English teacher, thank you.
Not among honest "grammarians", there isn't.
Washington, D.C. Mayor Adrian M. Fenty made good on his vow to contest the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruling that the city’s 1976 handgun ban is unconstitutional, because the Second Amendment applies to individuals as well as to militias - and the Supreme Court is now considering whether to take up the issue of what the Founding Fathers meant by these words”
____________________________________________________________
Absolute, unadulterated idiocy. All one has to do to see what the founding fathers meant ...is to simply look at the original 13 State Constitutions regarding the ownership of guns. Once you read those....there is no confusion.
How the Pre-Civil War Supreme Court viewed the RKBA.
From Dred Scott vs Sandford, 1856. Justice John Taney.
........It would give to persons of the negro race, who were recognised as citizens in any one State of the Union, the right to enter every other State whenever they pleased, singly or in companies, without pass or passport, and without obstruction, to sojourn there as long as they pleased, to go where they pleased at every hour of the day or night without molestation, unless they committed some violation of law for which a white man would be punished; and it would give them the full liberty of speech in public and in private upon all subjects upon which its own citizens might speak; to hold public meetings upon political affairs, and to keep and carry arms wherever they went..............
A reference to a few of the provisions of the Constitution will illustrate this proposition.
For example, no one, we presume, will contend that Congress can make any law in a Territory respecting the establishment of religion, or the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press, or the right of the people of the Territory peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for the redress of grievances.
**************
Nor can Congress deny to the people the right to keep and bear arms, nor the right to trial by jury, nor compel any one to be a witness against himself in a criminal proceeding. ******************
That’s two armed English teachers.
That's one awfully dull Stiletto in dire need of some sharpening.
rp, RIP - !@FR.
See http://www.guncite.com/second_amendment_commas.html for more references on this issue.
“A Box of Jelly Donuts, being necessary to feed Elvis, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
Is better contextually,
“A Box of Jelly Donuts, being necessary to feed Elvis, the right of Elvis to get fat, shall not be infringed.”
In my not paying attention during English class opinion.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.