The Second Amendment

"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 Second Amendment to the United States Constitution appears to be straightforward and simple. In fact it is deceptively simple. What makes it “deceptive” is that the common usage of words in the English language has changed somewhat in the years since the Bill of Rights was penned and the understanding of the rules of English grammar are less precise today than they were at that time.

The two words in the Second Amendment which create an obstacle to understanding for the early 21st Century reader are “regulated” and “Militia”.

To an educated English language speaker of the late 18th or early 19th Century the word “regulated” in the context of the phrase “well regulated Militia” did not mean “controlled by law”, it meant “equipped” as in armed. To James Madison, the writer of the Second Amendment and the delegates to the constitutional convention a well regulated Militia was a well armed Militia.

This leads us to the second word that causes problems for the modern reader, “Militia”. In the world of the Framers oppressive governments did not enforce their will upon their populations by police forces, instead they used standing armies. It was King George’s Redcoats which backed up his tax collectors and enforced his royal decrees. To the Founding Fathers a standing army was a danger to the liberty of the people.

To the Framers the best way for a free nation to defend itself from invasion was through the use of a Militia. Now understand this, to them a Militia was not a formal body like the National Guard. That was what they termed a “Select Militia” and they believed that a select militia was as great a threat to the freedom of the population as a standing army. This was because the members of the select militia were subject to call up by the government and were sworn to obey the government, just like the standing Army.

This attitude is summed up in this quotation by George Mason:

"That the people have a Right to mass and to bear arms; that a well regulated militia composed of the Body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper natural and safe defense of a free State..."

Mason understood that a standing army could defend a nation but did not feel that it was “safe” because of its potential for misuse at the hands of an oppressive state.

The Militia, as it was viewed by the framers, was the whole body of the male population within a certain age range, say between 18 and 49, except for some government officials, who were exempt because of their prior commitments.

In the plans of the Founders if the nation suffered an invasion the standing Army (limited by law to fewer than 1000 men) would proceed to the area of the foreign incursion and join with the local militia. The professional soldiers would form the core of the fighting force which would repel the invasion. This is why there were laws on the books which required all men to own and maintain in working order at least one musket, a bayonet and a minimum amount of powder and shot.

The militia was also, and this was of equal importance to the Framers, to be a check upon domestic tyranny. As Alexander Hamilton said:

"[I]f circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude, that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little if at all inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their rights and those of their fellow citizens." -- The Federalist, No. 29

Elbridge Gerry had this comment in debate in the US House of Representatives on August 17, 1789:

"What, sir, is the use of militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty. . . Whenever Government means to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise a standing army upon its ruins." -- Debate, U.S. House of Representatives, August 17, 1789

It is plain that the Founding Fathers had something very different from the modern National Guard in mind when they wrote the Second Amendment.

There is another issue here too. Remember when I said that the obstacles to understanding the wording of the Second Amendment were centered on two words and one rule of grammar? Well we have dealt with the words; now let us look at the grammar.

The phrase, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free state,” is a preparatory clause and does not modify the following clause. That means that the phrase could be eliminated from the sentence without changing its meaning. If you doubt me ask an English professor.

Since most university professors are left-wing moonbats read this statement to him and tell him that it is from the proposed “Access to Education Act of 2006”: “Well trained technicians, being necessary to the functioning of a technological society, the right of students to attend technical colleges shall not be infringed.” Then ask if removing the phrase, “Well trained technicians, being necessary to the functioning of a technological society,” changes the meaning of the phrase “the right of students to attend technical colleges shall not be infringed”.


Go ahead. If the professor is one who got his job by actually knowing English (as opposed to one of the professoriate who got his job by advanced Leftist activism or as a minority set-aside) he will confirm that the meaning of the sentence is the same with or without the preparatory clause.

What this means in regard to the debate about gun control in the United States is that the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution forbids the government from “infringing” the right of the people to keep and bear arms. “Infringe” means to limit or obstruct. So, according the Second Amendment the government may not limit or obstruct the people’s right to keep (own) or bear (carry) arms (guns).

This is clearly what the Founding Fathers thought:

The great object is, that every man be armed."

- Patrick Henry

"While the people have property, arms in their hands, and only a spark of noble spirit, the most corrupt Congress must be mad to form any project of tyranny."

- Rev. Nicholas Collin, Fayetteville Gazette (N.C.), October 12, 1789

"A militia when properly formed are in fact the people themselves . . . and include all men capable of bearing arms. . . To preserve liberty it is essential that the whole body of people always possess arms... The mind that aims at a select militia, must be influenced by a truly anti-republican principle." --

"... whereas, to preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them..."

- Richard H. Lee, Additional Letters from the Federal Farmer 53, 1788

"... of the liberty of conscience in matters of religious faith, of speech and of the press; of the trail by jury of the vicinage in civil and criminal cases; of the benefit of the writ of habeas corpus; of the right to keep and bear arms.... If these rights are well defined, and secured against encroachment, it is impossible that government should ever degenerate into tyranny."

- James Monroe

All quotations are found here.