Comrades,
As of late, there has been some talk about “gun control”. This talk is mostly done by the Bourgeois, i.e. Liberals/Democrats/Progressives. More specifically, this talk has been around a Civil Liberty that is enshrined in the Constitution of the United States, specifically the Second Amendment. Let’s take a look at what the Second Amendment says.
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.”
With some recent releases about the NSA domestically spying, the ALCU, i.e. American Civil Liberties Union, has gone to court to challenge what the NSA is doing. More specifically, the ACLU is going to court against violations that the Federal Government has performed against those Civil Liberties enshrined in the Constitution, i.e. First Amendment and Fourth Amendment. Now if the ACLU is so concerned with the Civil Liberties that are protected in the Constitution, i.e. Bill of Rights, what is the ALCU’s position on the Second Amendment? Well, you can find that here.
Here is some of what the ACLU states their policy is when it comes to the Civil Liberty enshrined in the Bill of Rights:
“Given the reference to “a well regulated Militia” and “the security of a free State,” the ACLU has long taken the position that the Second Amendment protects a collective right rather than an individual right…For seven decades, the Supreme Court’s 1939 decision in United States v. Miller was widely understood to have endorsed that view…the Supreme Court’s decision in D.C. v. Heller held for the first time that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to keep and bear arms, whether or not associated with a state militia. The ACLU disagrees with the Supreme Court’s conclusion about the nature of the right protected by the Second Amendment…Although ACLU policy cites the Supreme Court’s decision in U.S. v. Miller as support for our position on the Second Amendment, our policy was never dependent on Miller. Rather, like all ACLU policies, it reflects the ACLU’s own understanding of the Constitution and civil liberties.”
The first point the ACLU raises is that they take the Second the Amendment to be a Collective Right and not an Individual Right. The ACLU mentions that Heller v. D.C. has overturned this idea and enshrined that the Second Amendment is an Individual Right. The second point the ACLU raises is that they used United States v. Miller to form some basis of support for their view of Second Amendment being a Collective Right. The third point the ACLU raises is that their policy was never dependent on the Supreme Courts views to begin with, but instead was based on their “own understanding of the Constitution and civil liberties.”
Let us review what the United States Government, through definitions in the US Code, what the meaning of Milita is, which are all found in Title 10 of the United States Code.
Ҥ 311. Militia: composition and classes
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.(b) The classes of the militia are—(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and (2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.”
Moreover, Title 10 of the US Code also defines what the National Guard are as follows:
1) The term ‘‘National Guard’’ means the Army National Guard and the Air National Guard. (2) The term ‘‘Army National Guard’’ means that part of the organized militia of the several States and Territories, Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia, active and inactive, that…(C) is organized, armed, and equipped wholly or partly at Federal expense; and (D) is federally recognized. (3) The term ‘‘Army National Guard of the United States’’ means the reserve component of the Army all of whose members are members of the Army National Guard. (4) The term ‘‘Air National Guard’’ means that part of the organized militia of the several States and Territories, Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia, active and inactive, that—
So the United States recognizes that there are two Militias: Organized Militia and Unorganized Militia. The National Guard is part of the Organized Militia, and the National Guard is part of the United States Army or Air force. Thus, All National Guard are contained within Army, but not all Army are contained within the National Guard. So those who are part of the Organized Militia, or National Guard, are contained within the US military.
It doesn’t take the Heller v. D.C. ruling by the Supreme Court to understand that the Second Amendment wasn’t a Collective Right, nor even close to a Collective Right. Let us just review two things that US v. Miller stated.
(1) “In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a “shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length” at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment, or that its use could contribute to the common defense.”
The Supreme Court, in US v. Miller point out that a sawed off shotgun isn’t considered to be a weapon that the military uses. We have to keep in mind that the Court made a ruling based on the conditions that brought the case to them, and the condition was that of a weapon that wasn’t part of common weaponry that the Armed forces used.
However, an AR-15, whether automatic or semi-automatic, are common weaponry that the Armed forces use. We notice this from what has been going on in Afghanistan or Iraq. The US Military forces, as well as the National Guard (i.e. Organized Militia), were given AR-15’s. These are also some standard issue weapons that the Army gives to infantry. So an AR-15 “contributes to the common defense”, while a sawed off shotgun doesn’t “contribute to the common defense.”
(2) “when called for service these men were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time.”
The Supreme Court points out that when the government calls upon people into the Organized Militia, they are “expected to appear bearing arms”. But if the Second Amendment is a Collective Right, then how can these people come bringing arms that they have “supplied by themselves” when they aren’t allowed to own them individually? They can’t.
So we immediately notice that the Second Amendment applies to the Unorganized Militia, not to the Organized Militia. The Organized Militia is “armed, and equipped wholly or partly at Federal expense.” The Unorganized Militia isn’t armed or equipped at Federal expense.
Moreover, we can notice, from the case cited, that the Unorganized Militia must provide for their own arms so that when they are called up into the Organized Militia, they have their own arms to provide for the “common defense”.
Handguns are obviously part of ordinary military equipment and used to contribute to the common defense. AR-15’s, whether automatic or semi-automatic, perform the same function. So individuals are expected to bring forth their arms that they have supplied for themselves, and these weapons themselves obviously being in common use so that they can buy them with ease. So handguns and AR-15s are of this sort as well.
What makes the ACLU’s position so weird is this: The ACLU would state that only the Federal Government or State Government are allowed to own weapons. This would mean that if either the Federal Government or State Government, or both, were to become tyrannical government, there would be no recourse for The People to stand up against the Tyranny. In other words, if the ACLU were around during the Revolutionary War, then the ACLU would want to disarm the Founding Fathers and leave all power with the Tyrannical Government of King George III.
What is even stranger about the ACLU’s position is this: When an individual signs up to join either the Army or National Guard, you sign a contract in which you state that the Federal Government owns you. The ACLU would only allow for Individuals who are the property of the Government to own weapons. In other words, the ACLU would make it so that only those who the Government own are allowed to bear arms. But this is completely contradictory to the Principles of the US Constitution, and especially against the Principle of Separation of Powers enshrined in the US Constitution.
Comrade Conservative 