[BuckeyeTexan]

Ms. Hillman is apparently ignorant of the fact that the majority of the gun crimes committed in Chicago are by criminals who carry concealed weapons illegally. Overturning the gun ban isn't going to change their actions. They'll still rob and murder. A gun ban has consequences for law-abiding citizens, not criminals.

[Red in Blue PA]

In other words, those serving in a militia - or in the present - a branch of the Armed Services - have the right to bear arms.

That's funny Ms. Hillman, around the time of the Constitution, everyone owned guns, not just those in the militia.

[Shellback Chuck]

Who are the militia, if they be not the people of this country...? I ask, who are the militia? They consist of now of the whole people, except a few public officers.
To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them.

George Mason

[ZULU]

“The amendment talks about a well-regulated militia and thus, it would seem that the right to bear arms is directly related to a militia. In other words, those serving in a militia - or in the present - a branch of the Armed Services - have the right to bear arms.”

STUNNING ANALYSIS CAROL!!!!! It floors me!! OF COURSE!!!

Why didn't I see that!!!! The Founding Fathers felt it necessary to add an amendment guaranteeing the right of the militia to have weapons!!! HOW CLEAR!!! Why, if it were not for this amendment our militia,our national guard, maybe event our MILITARY would NOT BE ABLE TO BEAR ARMS!!!! They would have to fight instead with - say dust mops or brooms. And THAT would be a severe HANDICAP!

Hmm. I just wonder how all those other countries manage to arm their military forces without a Second Amendment. Guess they weren't as smart as our Founding Fathers!!

Carol, I am happy you are dismayed. When someone so logically challenged as you are, is dismayed, I KNOW we are on the right track!!!

[Lazamataz]

The amendment talks about a well-regulated militia and thus, it would seem that the right to bear arms is directly related to a militia. In other words, those serving in a militia - or in the present - a branch of the Armed Services - have the right to bear arms. Of course, I cannot prove that my reading of the amendment is correct -- but gun rights supporters cannot prove that the right to bear arms extends to people who are not in the military!

Yes they can. DC Versus Heller.

[ctdonath2]

When DC’s ban was overturned, homicide rates dropped to a 43-year low.

‘nuff said.

[Celerity]

“That may be, but much of the time, it is a person with a gun! “

False. “Much of the time..” it’s with a car.

[Dead Corpse]

English fail. It doesn't say "Right of the militia", it says "Right of the People". In order to even HAVE a militia, folks need to be armed.

Morons or liars. Possibly both knowing libs...

[Oldpuppymax]

Ms Hillman, you should REALLY read something about our nation, it’s founding and the men who did it. You really should. Of course FACTS won’t change your leftist “MIND”, but at least you would KNOW you are full of SHITE!!

[Kozak]

I think if the citizens of Chicago are unarmed, so should the the police. Also all the bailiffs in the courtrooms and the security guards for the city officials.

[broken_arrow1]

Chicago Mafia and street gangs must be members of the Militia if they have guns! This libtard is f-cked up!

[VeniVidiVici]

Of course, I cannot prove that my reading of the amendment is correct -- but gun rights supporters cannot prove that the right to bear arms extends to people who are not in the military!

[Graybeard58]

Hard to know where to start with such idiocy. Does the author think she has come up with some new argument? It's just as stupid now as it has always been.

[Gilbo_3]

is this chick retarded ???

welcome to the 21st century where the collectivist theory isnt even supported by leftcomms anymore...

[SECURE AMERICA]

Ms Hillman like the rest of her ilk are not much of a historian. Tje militia in the days of our founders who wrote the Constitution were not soldiers per se they were farmers, shop owners etc. In plain words the people. Not the standing Government military..

[windsorknot]

One day Carol may find herself in a situation when a handgun would be handy.

[cbkaty]

.......and freedom of speech is a right of only those associated with the press.......BWAHAHAHAHA.

These people have university degrees? They must be giving them away at....kool-aid stands......

[Wolverine83]

I could not believe that this was actually published in a major newspaper in the editorial section. The writing and reasoning appears to be at the 3rd grade level. Perhaps one of her children wrote the article.

So I checked. This is actually a letter to the editors. Perhaps it was published (though I don’t really believe this) to illustrate the general reasoning skills of the anti-gun crowd.

[dread78645]

I can only speak for myself, but I would feel a lot less safe if the Chicago handgun ban is overturned. I suspect crime rates after the ban is lifted will prove me right!

Another triumph of Hope over Experience?

[Manly Warrior]

Here is my commet to her blog:

“The Second Ammendment is a complex, compound sentnce that simply is two thoughts, connected to each other and with clear relational association/modification of and to each other.

The concept of the “militia” in our founding history has always been the people, every able bodied male. The fact that the militia was/still is the people, nothwithstanding that the national guard was created in 1913 or so out of the states’ Organized Militias, remains. How can one be a self-armed and equipped member of the general/unorganized militia if you may not possess arms?

Also, and probably more important to your analysis, no one in the military has a “right” to bear arms, rather we can do so only under orders of commanders and ultimately the President. Military arms, other than those in use by such direction, are secured in a 2 person-controlled access arms room. If you think soliders are armed at their whim (as one endowed with a “right” would be so empowered) you are out of touch with reality. The terror attack at Fort Hood shows that fact.

You may not like arms yourself, so don’t buy one or exercise your right to self-defense via firearm, dial 911; best of luck, as LEOs are under no legal requirement or mandate to respond to anyone, rather, per SCOTUS ruling,which indicates that LEOs are required to generally enforce/protect us.

Please Do not think of treading on my right.”

[DesertConservative]

Ms. Hillman should be forced to wear a T-shirt reading:

“Unarmed and helpless, and proud of it!”