Subject:
|
Re: Description vs. argument
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 15 Jan 2001 18:16:57 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1406 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> Words change meanings, but to understand the 2nd, you have to know what
> militia meant to the founding fathers, and what they meant when they said
> it. Intent is difficult to judge but I tend to go by the claimed intent
> described in the Federalist Papers, not with what some random lying around
> the house (or Random House) dictionary has in it.
You make good points, both for the importance of meaning and the difficulty
of determining intent. As I understand it, the term "militia" as it applies to
the 2nd has never come before the Supreme Court, so there is no "final"
definition to be applied. On the plus side, that allows the average joe to own
weapons (not simply to overthrow the gov't, but--as someone pointed out in a
previous debate--as a demonstration of The Constitution's trust in the citizen
to possess such freedom). On the down side, there's no ironclad,
Constitutional means to deny gun ownership yet still keep within the
resuirements of the 2nd.
Random House--or even the OED, which I'm sure some reader of this message
will cite--has no special wisdom regarding the interpretation of Constitutional
matters, other than in providing basic foundation definitions.
Dave!
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Description vs. argument
|
| (...) I am not sure if it is what you are after, but if you scroll down to "THE SECOND AMENDMENT IN THE COURTS" at (URL) find: "Since Miller, the Supreme Court has addressed the Second Amendment twice more, upholding New Jersey’s strict gun control (...) (24 years ago, 15-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Description vs. argument
|
| (...) Your dictionary is wrong, when viewed in the context of the US constitution. Words change meanings, but to understand the 2nd, you have to know what militia meant to the founding fathers, and what they meant when they said it. Intent is (...) (24 years ago, 15-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
188 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
