Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bungling the meaning of 'the right to bear arms'
Sarasota Herald-Tribune ^ | 1 Apr 2014 | Lee Williams

Posted on 04/02/2014 1:55:23 PM PDT by shove_it

When someone misinterprets the Second Amendment, it's usually the first part they get wrong.

Facts “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.”

They'll quibble about the meaning of “militia,” or opine about the framers' intent behind “well regulated.”

It's usually not the second part of the amendment, the “keep and bear” part, that gets misconstrued.

That, however, is exactly the part that the Florida Sheriff's Association seems to have trouble understanding.

A bit of background:

The chaos that ensued after Hurricane Katrina was part of the legislative intent behind HB-209, Rep. Heather Fitzenhagen's bill that would allow Floridians to carry firearms during a mandatory evacuation — with or without a concealed carry license.

It protects folks from being charged with a crime or having their firearms confiscated if they are ordered to leave their homes.

Gov. Rick Scott and the Florida National Guard support the legislation.

The bill, which passed the House Judiciary Committee last week with a vote of 17-1 and is ready for the House floor, has received widespread acclaim from gun owners. However, it's garnered aggressive opposition from the powerful Florida Sheriff's Association.

In testimony before the committee, Electra Bustle, a lobbyist for the sheriffs, told the lawmakers that “there is a difference between owning a firearm and carrying one concealed on your person. Owning a firearm is a right. Carrying concealed is a privilege, and it is a privilege that is earned by showing a higher degree of training and proficiency with a firearm.” [...]

(Excerpt) Read more at heraldtribune.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; News/Current Events; US: Florida
KEYWORDS: 2ndamendment; banglist; donutwatch; fl; florida; hb209; heatherfitzenhagen; secondamendment
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-31 last
To: Dead Corpse
FYI, its called treason.

And yes I am being serious, it is an attempt by "cowards" to subvert the Federal Constitution, and overthrow the government....

BTW the whole "firearm" issue is not what the law says,

Title, 26, 27. 18 USC give the legal definition of what a "Firearm" is, and guess what it ain't a pistol....

21 posted on 04/02/2014 3:02:53 PM PDT by SERE_DOC ( “The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it.” TJ.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: DManA

So I am the engineer making high tech gizmos for the Sheriff, or the nurse caring for them in retirement, but I need to be priviledged by them to cadry a weapon.

Are these people serious? Is this the King’s land?


22 posted on 04/02/2014 3:03:45 PM PDT by lavaroise (A well regulated gun being necessary to the state, the rights of the militia shall not be infringed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: bunkerhill7

I would recommend that you look at the 1902 Dick Act, AKA the Efficiency of Militia Act. You will find that it has never been repealed, it defines the Milita (and yes you are correct) and if these clowns in DC try to repeal it, the military and law enforcement would have to surrender their weapons.


23 posted on 04/02/2014 3:07:58 PM PDT by SERE_DOC ( “The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it.” TJ.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse
The Constitution has a misspelling....it's "bare".

Concealed is something all together different.

24 posted on 04/02/2014 3:12:57 PM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: shove_it

Good article, thanks for posting.


25 posted on 04/02/2014 3:13:03 PM PDT by cyn (Benghazi.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shove_it
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.

Diagram the sentence, just like you learned in English class:

The subject is the right of the people to keep and bear arms. In this subject, "of the people" is a noun phrase that specifies the right to which the predicate applies. Similarly, "to keep and bear arms" is an infinitive phrase that again narrows the subject under discussion, leading to a final definition of the subject under discussion - the predicate applies not to all rights, only to rights of the people, and among all the rights held by people, the predicate applies only to the right to keep and bear arms. The infinitive phrase "to keep and bear arms" specifies two rights of the people: the right to keep arms, and the right to bear arms. The wording does not create each right, rather the preexistence of those rights is assumed.

The predicate is in the simple future tense, negated, and provides the strongest possible restriction on the action "to infringe" when applied to the subject. "Shall not be infringed" is stronger and broader than the First Amendment limitation of "Congress shall make no law," applying to all three branches of the federal government rather than just the legislative branch, and cannot be made stronger with any choice of words.

As for the Militia Clause: "a well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state," this clause contains a subject A well regulated militia and a gerund phrase being necessary to the security of a free state. The wording does not include any hint that this militia clause is intended to act as a restrictive clause, one that could narrow the meaning of an earlier or later subject. Rather, the militia clause is a nonrestrictive relative clause, set off by commas, that is intended to add information without modifying the subject of the main clause.

The bottom line: the right of the people to keep and bear arms is assumed by the wording to be a preexisting and unconditional right. The predicate shall not be infringed applies to that right without any limitation. Thus the right of the people to keep arms shall not be infringed by any branch of the federal government, and the right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed by any branch of the federal government. Neither the subject nor the predicate is modified by the militia clause. The militia clause A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state provides added information on the importance of the right under discussion but does not in any way restrict or limit that right.

/End pedantic monologue.

26 posted on 04/02/2014 3:26:00 PM PDT by Pollster1 ("Shall not be infringed" is unambiguous.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bunkerhill7

Your tag line says it all. If it was manufactured, if I can build one in my gunshop and can carry it physically I damn sure will.


27 posted on 04/02/2014 3:46:08 PM PDT by progunner (no compromise)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: WilliamRobert

Federal, so... US Marshalls...


28 posted on 04/02/2014 4:54:01 PM PDT by Dead Corpse (Tre Norner eg ber, binde til rota...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: shove_it

Pro-2nd Amendment, constitutional sheriffs support the bearing of arms by people in all circumstances. Knuckle-dragging, 50 IQ Gestapo apes don’t.

The Florida Sheriff’s Association has apparently thrown in with the Gestapo. Time for the good citizens of Florida to get busy and throw these apes out of elected office.


29 posted on 04/02/2014 5:06:17 PM PDT by sergeantdave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse
(hic) I'm with ya brother (hic).


30 posted on 04/02/2014 5:41:04 PM PDT by VRW Conspirator ( 2+2 = V)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1

Shall not be infringed by any form of government


31 posted on 04/02/2014 6:28:01 PM PDT by teeman8r (Armageddon won't be pretty, but it's not like it's the end of the world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-31 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson