A Free People are Soverign. Government is their servant, not their master.

Vol.4 No.5 December 17th, 2000

SOMEBODY HAS BEEN ALTERING THE TEXT OF THE SECOND AMENDMENT

For the last few years whenever I have quoted the Second Amendment I have used the text as printed in my 1950 version of The World Book Encyclopedia, as follows:

Now recently I commented on a very interesting essay by Joyce Lee Malcolm. In this essay the author refers to some kind of a "comma theory" which she says is being used in an effort to interpret a different, and anti-gun meaning into the Second Amendment.

She writes:

Then there was the "comma theory," which argued that the stem of the Second Amendment's single sentence, which refers to "the right of the people," can be eliminated because it is set off by commas. The amendment would then read, "A well regulated militia being necessary to a free state...shall not be infringed."

She provides an incorrect copy of the Second Amendment with this in her essay:

Where did this corruption come from, I wondered. To check this, I looked up the Bill of Rights on a couple of what I would think would be reliable sources:

University of Oklahoma, College of Law:

National Archives and Records Administration

NRA

Cornell Law Library

Only two copies are the same: The NRA agrees with the national archives. Everyone else has their own version. Which one is right? Or are they all wrong?

Now, having been involved in arguments of this type before I might note that the only way to resolve the question is to READ THE ORIGINAL. Well, I don't have the original, obviously, but we can look at scanned copies of the original, online. Go to Capitol Hill /Senate /Bill of Rights Note: access is via WayBack Machine (Internet Web Pages Archives). The original disappeared shortly after I compiled this research, and many of the error texts were altered to a consistent, but badly corrupted format.

Here you will find a particularly clear scan of the Bill of Rights. Go to the index and download the actual scanned copy of the original DO NOT READ THE "PRESENTATION".

I downloaded it for you and clipped Article the Fourth and I present that to you, here:

Remember that the original proposal for the Bill of Rights, as submitted to the States for ratification contained twelve articles. The first two articles were not passed and so Article the Fourth of the original became the Second Amendment. You can go to this page and check it yourself, if you like.

In addition, my book ORIGINAL INTENT by David Barton provides exactly the same copy of the Second amendment that I found (1) In the World Book (1950) (2) On the scanned copy, and (3) Webster's Unabridged Dictionary, Second Edition. Interestingly the World Book and Webster's read "well-regulated"; the other two sources read "well regulated".

The Framers were good with the English language. I rather doubt they would have written a mess of a sentence as is now appearing as the "official text".

An observation, if I may: The Second Amendment is an injunction against the Federal Government in consequence whereof the Federal Government has NO AUTHORITY to make any law which can be used as a basis for bringing any legal action against any person for possession of arms or for carrying arms. The Second Amendment does not grant any rights. And the Second Amendment does not apply to individuals. However, if you, as a Citizen of these united States have a gun in your possession or carry a gun about with you the Federal Government has no authority to take any action against you because the Second Amendment denies to the Federal Government the authority necessary for taking action against a citizen in any matter related to keeping or to bearing arms.

Opponents of the Second Amendment have long desired to alter the accepted meaning of the Second Amendment so that instead of protecting the people the Second Amendment would protect the militia as follows: "The Second Amendment is an injunction against the Federal Government in consequence whereof the Federal Government has NO AUTHORITY to make any law which can be used as a basis for bringing any legal action against any state militia for possession of arms or for carrying arms." It would appear that opponents of the Second Amendment wish to change the commonly accepted text of the Second Amendment in order to effect their desired change in the meaning of the Second Amendment. If a change in the original text of the Second Amendment is necessary to change the meaning of the Second Amendment in this manner then it is fully evident that the Second Amendment as originally written does not mean what the opposition would like to say it means. And so, by attempting to change the original text of the Second Amendment the opposition has conceded their principle and revealed themselves for the scoundrels they are. This comes as no surprise to Defenders of the Second Amendment as even exhaustive study of writings from the Founding Period have produced nothing to substantiate the arguments of the opposition.

Don't Get Nervous...

It is CRIMINALS who commit rape. It is CRIMINALS who commit murder, armed robbery, stabings and beatings.

It is the LIBERALS who are holding the door to the jail open with one hand, letting thugs, rapists, murderers and villians out free and at the same time trying to DISARM YOU with the other hand.

What response to they expect from us?

END

NAPFN Homepage  Pastor Mike's LINK LIST   
Firearms & Freedom: Vol.4 No.4 (Previous Issue)