Cumberland Times-News

May 14, 2013

We’re twisting the meaning of the Founding Fathers’ words

To the Editor:
Cumberland Times-News

— I really had to chuckle when I read a recent comment someone made in a northeastern publication: “I’d like to suggest that Congress make a tiny change in our Second Amendment that would more accurately reflect the Founding Father’s intent (to wit): “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear muskets, shall not be infringed.”

Actually, I don’t think this an entirely original quote because I remember hearing it years ago, but it definitely speaks volumes, as apparently the authors of the original Second Amendment did not intent to do.

The legal Second Amendment as ratified by the States and authenticated by Thomas Jefferson when he was the Secretary of State, says: “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.”

Any interpretation of the phrase “right of the people to keep and bear arms” is always faced with the plural nature of the key word “arms.”

In today’s world, the plural of “arms” jumps from a Pandora’s Box that “the people” have great difficulty closing.

The plural of “arms” suggest that any form, function and power of a person’s right to “bear arms” is fair game, therefore, in interpreting the Second Amendment, it seems that any device, including “firearms,” is allowable by law for us folks to “bear.”

For legal pundits employing the full manifold use of the term “arms” there is no such thing as overkill when it come to the people’s right to defend themselves that is necessary to the “security of a free state,” and therefore, the security of their personal being.

People, being what they are, are generally incapable of exercising prior-restraint when it comes to getting what they want.

And, let’s face it, this country, its people, its media, and its legal-schmegal wrangling and doublespeak can turn even the best intentions of our Founding Fathers’ intention into “It’s the man, not the gun” specious (expletive) nonsense.

After all, American culture has an insatiable appetite for “arms and firearms” in all of the deadly and destructive glory and gory the big screen can bring.

Who? Who wants to take my guns away!?

David Crockett

Cumberland