"Sorry, but owning guns is not guaranteed by our Constitution"

Fredericksburg.com (Opinion page) ^ | 3/24/06 | Ron Miller

[kiriath_jearim]

Sorry, but owning guns is not guaranteed by our Constitution

Ron Miller

Date published: 3/24/2006

Some people desperately want to believe that the Constitution gives them carte blanche regarding gun ownership, while at the same time pretending that this somehow makes them part of a "well-regulated militia" ["Confused about Second Amendment? Blame Congress," March 6].

True, we once had a civilian militia and it did win a couple of battles, but gun owners then had just as much repugnance for government regulation as they do now, and the idea was quickly recognized as a failure and was abandoned.

If it had been a success, our country would be defended by a "well-regulated militia" today, wouldn't we?

It's true, as letter-writer Kenneth Baylor said, that the Swiss have a very successful civilian militia, but service in it is compulsory, along with drills, training, and a hierarchy of command; and while its conscripted members are allowed to keep their government-issued weapons at home, their ammunition is stored separately at military bases.

That is certainly a "well-regulated militia," but I somehow don't think this is what American gun owners have in mind or would put up with for one second.

I'll reiterate what I said before: I believe Americans have a right to own guns but that the Constitution does not unambiguously guarantee that right--something those who balk at the word "well-regulated" would like to ignore.

Ron Miller King George

Date published: 3/24/2006

[Paladin2]

Spell it out as part of the privacy amendment we need to add.

[djf]

What an idiot.

http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm

The collective right theory has been tossed on the trash heap where it belongs.

[Modok]

The 2nd amendment does not give me the right to own guns but it does keep me free of government and asses like you working to destroy a right that was mine before the constitution was written.

[Cyclopean Squid]

Amazing he went through the entire piece and forgot "the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." I'm sure that was an oversight, since he kept remembering to quote "well-regulated."

[Darkwolf377]

Why do I have the feeling that this writer would claim that the constitution DOES guarantee the right to an abortion?

[axes_of_weezles]

I wonder if Mr Miller has personally disarmed.

[edcoil]

I'd say that the intent of the founders was for the 2nd amendment to give you the human right of self protection and protection from government.

[mthom]

This guy cant see a right to bear arms in the Constituion but Im willing to bet he sees the absolute right to abortion in there.

[wolfpat]

What this numbskull fails to understand is that we, the people, are the regulators, not the regulatees.

[in hoc signo vinces]

The anti-gun nuts only see what furthers their agenda within the constitution...and rarely is that ever the facts and/or the truth.

[zzen01]

From My COLD DEAR FINGERS, "Ron" you POS!

[tsomer]

It's true, as letter-writer Kenneth Baylor said, that the Swiss have a very successful civilian militia, but service in it is compulsory, along with drills, training, and a hierarchy of command; and while its conscripted members are allowed to keep their government-issued weapons at home, their ammunition is stored separately at military bases.

Is the private purchase and ownership of firearms illegal in Switzerland?

I'm not conceding his claim that the right to bear arms applies exclusively to organized militias. I'm just curious.

[txroadkill]

Got to love Liberal logic:

You have to believe that the Founding Fathers never meant to protect gun owners but did foresee the need to allow abortion.

[Mogollon]

I see what you mean. It's clearly stated that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. This is way to plain and simple therefore that's not what it means.

Now if it were more obtuse and non-related like the right of privacy being a valid reason for women to murder their babies in the womb then it would be an iron-clad constitutional right. /s

[putupjob]

He should explain it to the Supreme and Appellate Courts who disagree with him, completely.

[Cyclopean Squid]

What does the "King George" he signed with signify? His location, or is it commentary?

[bill1952]

The 2nd amendment does not give me the right to own guns

"the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

What part of that does not give you the right to own guns?

[Andonius_99]

amazing article, thanks! Bookmarking that for later use...

[ARCADIA]

I'll reiterate what I said before: I believe Americans have a right to own guns but that the Constitution does not unambiguously guarantee that right--something those who balk at the word "well-regulated" would like to ignore.

He has that backwards; the Constitution no only provides a right to guns but implies that citizens have a right to organized themselves into functional militia units. Not to serve the government, but to protect themselves from wrongful governance. The bill of rights is a list of limits placed upon the government; it makes no sense to link "well regulated" with establishment forces operated by the government.