Guns, and why I hate semicolons (or commas)
Why Is The Sky Chartreuse?: Shenanigans, part 2
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.
When I was younger, there was a semicolon between "free State" and "the right of the people." This led to many different interpretations of what the second amendment really meant. As I remembered it, anyway. May not be true. My memory can play tricks on me. But it still leads me to a point: the grammatical structure of this sentence is wierd at best. Why not "...free State AND the right of the people..."? Comma or semicolon, it still lends to confusion.
Something that many anti-gun people may or may not forget is that one of the very first (if not THE first) battle of the Revolutionary War was fought by a militia...made out of a bunch of people with guns who got together for the common defense. Not exactly "well regulated," mind you (like today's army or national guards), but there it is. These people were called the Minutemen. The thinking behind this amendment is that, say if there IS another invasion in the future. What if the army is too far away at that time to do something about it (which is unlikely nowadays with helicopters, etc)? But still. There'd be a few thousand rednecks nearby in their Durangos with their 30-30s ready to help repel such an invasion, right next to the army. You take the guns away from these "gun nuts," and you've just reduced the U.S.'s ability to repel an invasion.
THAT is the thinking behind the Second Amendment, and why "militia" and "right of the people" are practically all done in one breath.
That having been said, of course, I support things like the Brady bill. Why would ANYONE need a gun RIGHT AWAY unless they had some ...um... need for it. I'm sure that if there were an invasion, and Bubba Joe Bob Cleetus McCoy needed an AK-47 from the local gun store, the store owner would completely ignore the waiting-period laws; and that the Justice Department would probably not give a shit, considering the circumstances. Banning guns outright is, in my opinion (despite the unlikeliness--yet still possibility--of an invasion) irresponsible.
Yes, I'm a middle-ground kind of guy.
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.
When I was younger, there was a semicolon between "free State" and "the right of the people." This led to many different interpretations of what the second amendment really meant. As I remembered it, anyway. May not be true. My memory can play tricks on me. But it still leads me to a point: the grammatical structure of this sentence is wierd at best. Why not "...free State AND the right of the people..."? Comma or semicolon, it still lends to confusion.
Something that many anti-gun people may or may not forget is that one of the very first (if not THE first) battle of the Revolutionary War was fought by a militia...made out of a bunch of people with guns who got together for the common defense. Not exactly "well regulated," mind you (like today's army or national guards), but there it is. These people were called the Minutemen. The thinking behind this amendment is that, say if there IS another invasion in the future. What if the army is too far away at that time to do something about it (which is unlikely nowadays with helicopters, etc)? But still. There'd be a few thousand rednecks nearby in their Durangos with their 30-30s ready to help repel such an invasion, right next to the army. You take the guns away from these "gun nuts," and you've just reduced the U.S.'s ability to repel an invasion.
THAT is the thinking behind the Second Amendment, and why "militia" and "right of the people" are practically all done in one breath.
That having been said, of course, I support things like the Brady bill. Why would ANYONE need a gun RIGHT AWAY unless they had some ...um... need for it. I'm sure that if there were an invasion, and Bubba Joe Bob Cleetus McCoy needed an AK-47 from the local gun store, the store owner would completely ignore the waiting-period laws; and that the Justice Department would probably not give a shit, considering the circumstances. Banning guns outright is, in my opinion (despite the unlikeliness--yet still possibility--of an invasion) irresponsible.
Yes, I'm a middle-ground kind of guy.
posted by xanadian at 10:52 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home