« Op-Ed piece on 2nd Amendment | Main | Brady Campaign in fallback position »
Detroit Free Press reprinted my letter to the editor
Haven't had much time to blog this weekend!
3 Comments | Leave a comment
Alan - indeed. You have hit on yet another of my pet peeves regarding those who argue in favor of gun control legislation. They often point to the "well regulated" language of the Second Amendment as evidence that the government can control guns.
The commonly understood meaning of many words and phrases have changed considerably over the past 225 years. As an example: 100 years ago, if a man was at a party and exclaimed “I feel very gay!” it would have a decidedly different effect on his party guests than it would today.
So it is with the word “regulated”. It is related to the word “regular.” Maybe you’ve seen the old pendulum-driven clocks in antique stores that say “Regulator” on the glass cover? That does not mean the clock is there to impose a government regulation. It comes from the fact that early clocks did not keep very regular time. When a mechanism was finally developed that was able to count off regular intervals of time, it was considered to be “well-regulated”, as in “made regular.”
At the time of the drafting of the constitution, those writing and reading it would not have understood “regulated” to mean “brought under control of government.” The idea of close government control of daily life - the modern understanding of “regulated” - was anathema to the drafters of the Constitution.
Something was “well regulated” if it was in proper, regular working order; i.e., functioning in an orderly manner.
Understanding the reasons behind the inclusion of the Bill of Rights and the debates regarding these issues at the time, it is clear that there is no way they meant that the government was to control an enumerated right. In light of why they were doing what they were doing, it makes no sense that they would draft a Bill of Rights specifically intended to identify those areas in which the new federal government did NOT have power, but then to state in the expression of one of those rights that the right is subject to specific government control. “Regulated” in that context simply does not mean what people think it means today.
Even today’s Merriam-Webster Dictionary offers as one meaning of “regulate”: “to bring order, method, or uniformity to.”
A “well-regulated” militia is one that is orderly and well-functioning. First, the “militia” was made up of “the people”:
“I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials.” - George Mason
“Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom? Congress shall have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American ... The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the People.”
— Tench Coxe
It was well understood that the militia was NOT meant to be under federal government control - hence George Mason’s statement that certain government officials were EXCLUDED. Every able-bodied male generally between the ages of 16 and 45 was required to turn out for militia drilling, and bring THEIR OWN properly functioning firearm - lock, stock and barrel (that is where that expression comes from). Because a well-regulated (i.e., drilled, practiced and therefore properly functioning) militia, made up of citizens, was seen as a fundamental right of the people to act in their own defense from other warring states and to quell insurrection, it was necessary to ensure that the people, individually, would not be debarred the ownership and use of military-style arms.
“No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.” - Thomas Jefferson
“The great object is that every man be armed . . . [e]veryone who is able may have a gun.” - Patrick Henry
Well regulated in the vernacular of the day meant that it, whatever it was, was well regulated in that functioned properly. Everything from clocks to windmills to militias.
Antique clocks are still around from that era that are named REGULATOR, right on their face. Meaning that their function could be trusted to be proper. Certainly those clocks did not require governmental interference nor approval to apprise one of the time, yet they were regulated. They were regulated to have 60 minutes in an hour, 24 hours in a day, and so forth. They functioned properly. Due to the efforts of the clock makers. Just exactly as the militia was expected to function properly due to the efforts of the people making the militia.
This isn't difficult, people. Anybody who sees or tells you there are complexities and nuances regarding this issue is patently dishonest. Tell him so. Inform him that you know him for a liar. Do not grant him the dignity of a "differing opinion holder". The issue is too clear. he is simply a liar.
It is well past time to quit allowing our courtesy and misplaced consideration of others feelings to be used as weapons against us.
Something which I don't think is getting enough attention: "well regulated" in the context of the 2A is actually synonomous to "well trained" isn't it? So, "A well trained militia, being necessary to the preservation of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms..." is much less ambiguous. Right?