ceremorphosis

The decision on theMcDonald v. Chicago case was issued by the Supreme Court late last month. The editorials are ramping up as both sides determine what the decision actually means. One common argument from the anti-gun owner side is that gun owners surely can not expect that the founders had the foresight that we would want semi-automatic handguns for the defense of our homes. That is a fallacious and misplaced argument. How so?

Let’s start with the Bill of Rights, which is too often neglected when arguing 2nd Amendment issues.

THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent starts of its institution.

Remember that founders like Jefferson lifted heavily from Locke. One might argue that the State, as defined by the founders, is the collection of the People guided by a common interest. The Government may be considered a growth of that State. Again, keep in mind the influence of John Locke and his concept of social contract.

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.

The Preamble is written to ensure that the Government does not abuse its powers, and to declare again the inherent rights of the People. The State is a separate entity from the Government. Therefore, the People in ensuring their freedom from a tyrannical Government, have an inherent right to bear arms. This right ensures that the State – the collection of the People – remains free.

The desire to ensure you are not ruled in tyranny is a Western concept going back two millennium. To mock gun owners by saying we think our forefathers were prescient is a straw man argument. It is, rather, that our forefathers were well aware of the course of human nature.

My question is whether regulated means “controlled” or if it means “properly functioning”.