Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Paul Helmke: The Second Amendment: The Real Issue

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
marmar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-02-07 09:58 AM
Original message
Paul Helmke: The Second Amendment: The Real Issue
from HuffPost:



Paul Helmke
The Second Amendment: The Real Issue
Posted December 2, 2007 | 03:24 AM (EST)


Too many participants in the debate over what the Second Amendment means have framed the issue incorrectly.

The question should not be whether the Amendment protects an "individual" or "collective" right to own guns. That is a red herring, one that leads partisans on either side to look at only half of the Amendment - either the "Militia purpose" clause, or the "keep and bear Arms" clause.

As I argued earlier, we have to read all the words in the Second Amendment, not just the ones we like.

Instead, the real issue in this debate is what purpose the Amendment was written to protect, and how, therefore, the Second Amendment should be interpreted and applied. Fortunately, the Supreme Court clearly spoke to that question in the 1939 Miller decision:


With obvious purpose to assure the continuation and render possible the effectiveness of such forces the declaration and guarantee of the Second Amendment were made. It must be interpreted and applied with that end in view.



So, according to the U.S. Supreme Court, the Second Amendment has a militia purpose. Not a hunting purpose. Not a self-defense purpose. Not a target-shooting purpose. Not a "private purpose." Just a militia purpose.

Unfortunately, however, the lower-court opinion in the DC gun case ignored this nearly 70-year-old precedent and invented a rationale to invest the Second Amendment with a non-existent "private purpose."

This is the central reason why that decision was clearly erroneous and should be reversed. ....(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-helmke/the-second-amendment-the_b_74971.html



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Toots Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-02-07 10:04 AM
Response to Original message
1. It is also the ONLY Amendment that states "well regulated"
People can argue over the meaning of well regulated but they can not argue that the wording is there..In any sense though it does not mean anyone can do anything...If it means having a regulated Militia then it doesn't mean personal use. If it means the individual should be "well regulated" then that means safety laws and certain restrictions..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
qdemn7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-02-07 10:15 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. Well, except for one little thing....
At the time, "well-regulated" did NOT mean laws, rules and regulations. It means trained. In other words, "well-trained".

http://www.webster.com/dictionary/regulate

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NightWatcher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-02-07 10:06 AM
Response to Original message
2. this is one of many items that will never be changed or resolved
when do we get on with our lives and hope to change the things that we have a chance to change?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
enfield collector Donating Member (821 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-02-07 10:17 AM
Response to Original message
4. paul helmke must be a karl rove operative.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Old Codger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-02-07 10:56 AM
Response to Original message
5. Miller decision
The miller decision was based on an outright lie by the government attorney Gorden Dean.

The second amendment is a recognition of the danger of standing armies. It's purpose is to recognize that every citizen has the right to keep and bear the same type of basic arms as a soldier in a modern military. A militia embodies all able bodied men over the age of 16. Therefore , a militia will always outnumber a standing army by at least twenty to one. If thei militia is armed with weapons similar to those used by the individuals comprising the standing army , it will be impossible for that standing army to to inflict the will of a tyrannical government upon the people. The Second Amendment is the ultimate guarantee behind all the other articles in the Bill of Rights. It is the utimate guarantee that citizens of the United States will always remain free.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 03:00 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC