ARMS: Rights make might

In response to Bruce Hansen’s “Guns: Amendment words to fight over:”

There is not room here to discuss case law, but I would like to address your conclusions on the meaning of the Second Amendment.

If one is to follow your reasoning that the phrase in the Second Amendment, “the right of the people” does not insure an individual the right to bear arms, then would that same phrase also being used in the First and Fourth Amendments, and in the case of the 10th Amendment, “to the people,” also imply a collective right, not an individual right, in circumstances involving free speech and religion, unreasonable searches and seizures, and undelegated powers respectively?

Due to a complete abandonment of civics instruction in our nation’s public schools, the vast majority of Americans have no clue of what the Bill of Rights is, or why they were drafted and ratified.

The Bill of Rights was ratified to amend the Constitution as a safeguard to the personal liberties of the individual citizen, and to insure the sovereignty of the several states. They are there to protect against abuses of power by a centralized federal government. This is very obviously stated in the Preamble to The Bill of Rights, but I am sure most people did not even know there was a preamble for this document.

Do not depend on wikipedia for your information. I would suggest that you read the source documents as well as the writings of those who drafted and signed them.

JD GAINES

Coeur d’Alene