Letter to the editor: A closer reading of the Second Amendment is needed – The Bozeman Daily Chronicle

I am mystified by those such as Matt Gaetz who read only a part of the Second Amendment to the Constitution as if that part were the whole and then assert that the right to bear arms is for the potential of leading an insurrection against the government of the United States. There appear to be many who hold such a misbegotten opinion. Here is what the Constitution says:

8.1 The Congress shall have Power

8.15 To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

8.16 To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

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.

How could it be clearer that the so-called militias around this country are not militias in the Constitutional sense? They dont even come close. They should not be called militias. I could come up with several different names for them. They are the opposite. They are the very thing that the militia might be called forth to suppress.

Thats just what happened in 1794 when George Washington rode at the head of the Militiamen to put down a rebellion. One cannot willy-nilly take up arms to participate in an insurrection to defend the Constitution because the very doing so violates the Constitution. Patriots wouldnt get close to the so-called militias.

See the original post:

Letter to the editor: A closer reading of the Second Amendment is needed - The Bozeman Daily Chronicle

Related Posts

Comments are closed.