New York Times On The 2nd Amendment

Who needs to read the Constitution when you have the New York Times interpreting it for you.

As a last little gift to America, Senator George Allen, who was narrowly defeated by James Webb this month, has introduced what may be his final piece of legislation: a bill that would allow the carrying of concealed weapons in national parks.

America’s confusion about the Second Amendment is now nearly total. An amendment that ensures a collective right to bear arms has been misread in one legislature after another — often in the face of strong public disapproval — as a law guaranteeing an individual’s right to carry a weapon in public.

America's confusion? I assume that means we, you know, the common people can't be trusted to read English and interpret something so simple on our own. We need the Times to keep us from getting confused.

Let's go to the source:

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.

Infringed? Now that's a tough one, let's look that up, too:

2. ... to affect (a person's rights, freedom, etc) in such a way as to limit or reduce them.

3. To interfere with (a person's rights).

Okay, I think I have it. The government shall not limit or interfere with one's right to keep and bear Arms. Seems a bit more straight forward than the Times would have one believe. It looks to me like they're the ones who are confused.

Funny how, as QandO points out, they always seem a bit more constructionist when it comes to Amendment One. And ironic that they want their rights observed, just not the ones that apply more to us common folk who have so much trouble understanding the Constitution. Uh huh....

Comments

[Steven Den Beste]

They're not constructionist about the First Amendment, either. When they read it, they see all communications between reporters and their sources as being privileged. I sure don't see anything like that in there.

[Purple Avenger]

http://uscode.house.gov/download/pls/10C13.txt

The Federal definition of "militia" handily demolishes the its "only the guard" argument too.

[Fred Beloit]

Let us not miss an opportunity to remind ourselves that the Times is the leading publisher of classified material in the USA. That used to be a crime, I believe.

[cab404]

Ironically, those who advocate weakening presidential power (when the president is Republican) do not realize that the 2nd Amendment represents the ultimate check upon the Executive Branch when all else fails.