The Second Amendment

"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."

Introduction

It is always prudent to define your terms, especially in an essay such as this. Those who argue against the individual's right to keep and bear arms duck and dodge this part of the conversation. Or they defer to court rulings or modern definitions of words. I choose to do neither. The definitions in this essay are taken from Webster's 1828 Dictionary, which is the closest dictionary we have readily available from the period in which the Bill of Rights was written. Since the meaning of words change over time, it is important to define these terms as the authors of the Bill of Rights did, so we use Webster's 1828 dictionary.

" , ". The Comma

I'd like to start this discussion in an unusual place, with that big bold grammatical element called the comma.

" , ". I love the comma. It is such an interesting part of our language. Here is what Websters 1828 dictionary had to say about it. 

COMMA n. [Gr. xo~qm,a segment, from ~ to cut off.]

1. In writing and printing, this point [ , ] denoting the shortest pause in reading, and separating a sentence into divisions or members, according to the construction.

Thus, "There is not a just man upon earth, that doeth good, and sinneth not."

Comma's represent a pause in speech, or a pause in thought, depending on the structure of the sentence. So let’s go on an English expedition and do something I always hated in school: Diagram a sentence!  Yes Mrs. Guernsey, I am actually using your English lesson J

A well regulated militia, [pause in reading] being necessary to the security of a free State,[ Pause in Thought] the right of the People to keep and bear arms, [pause in reading]
shall not be infringed."

It's clear from a diagram of this sentence that there are two separate thoughts here. Some will no doubt argue that this is not a proper diagram of this sentence, so lets go on to a few more definitions and see if they support or contradict this diagram. 

MILITIA - The body of soldiers in a state enrolled for discipline, but not engaged in actual service except in emergencies; as distinguished from regular troops, whose sole occupation is war or military service. The militia of a country are the able bodied men organized into companies, regiments and brigades, with officers of all grades, and required by law to attend military exercises on certain days only, but at other times left to pursue their usual occupations.

PEOPLE, 1. The body of persons who compose a community, town, city or nation. We say, the people of a town; the people of London or Paris; the English people. In this sense, the word is not used in the plural, but it comprehends all classes of inhabitants, considered as a collective body, or any portion of the inhabitants of a city or country.

Thank you Noah Webster. We clearly have two (2) separate groups of people mentioned in the Second Amendment: The militia, and the People. It is on this point that I will hang the rest of my essay. 

"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State…"

Please consider what document this statement is made in. Context does matter here, and the document this is recorded in matters. It is in the Bill of Rights, a document which enumerates and codifies the Rights of The People into writing. It does not list the rights of the Government, it lists the rights of the People. If we frame this statement in context which it exists, answer the following question: Does this statement by itself enumerate a right? Is it a right of the People to have a well regulated militia? The answer is, of course, no. In this statement alone no right is ever mentioned. So if it does not list a right, why say it? 

We should go back to our definitions and look at Militia again. The closest thing we have today that fits this definition of Militia is our Reserve Corps, or perhaps what we call the National Guard today. I believe this was meant to be at the Federal level, because it says 'a free State', not 'the free States', etc. Regardless of what this group was, or who had authority over them, it is absolutely clear from the definition of Militia that this group is separate and distinct from 'the People', which is all citizens of the country. It is this Militia that may be regulated, not the People.

REGULATE – To adjust by rule, method or established mode; as, to regulate weights and measures; to regulate the assize of bread; to regulate our moral conduct by the laws of God and of society; to regulate our manners by the customary forms.

2. To put in good order; as, to regulate the disordered state of a nation or its finances. 

3. To subject to rules or restrictions; as, to regulate trade ; to regulate diet.

REGULATED, Adjusted by rule, method or forms; put in good order; subject to rules and restrictions.

It me, it is absolutely clear, that our Founding Fathers understood the need to have able bodied men trained, organized, and ready to be called upon if the need arose. I believe they saw the possibility that the argument would eventually be made, and perhaps was even made in their day, that if we have a well regulated militia, there is no need for the individual to keep and bear arms. Many of these men had seen in their own lives how the Militia soon became an extension of the political desires of those in power. So the Founding Fathers acknowledgement that there is a need to have a well regulated militia, but went on to say…...

"…the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

Now we have the actual right that is being protected by this document. It is the right of the People to both keep and bear arms. Remember that the phrase "the People" encompasses all Citizens of this country, while the militia is a specific group of Citizens. This falls perfectly in line with the 'checks and balances' concept of our Government. Both the first and second amendments play a role in the checks and balances.