EgonSpengler
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2014
- Messages
- 12,260
Another thought about Scalia's opinion: He spends time examining the meaning of the 2nd Amendment, almost word-by-word.
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.
He examines the phrase "well regulated", he examines the term "Militia", he examines the term "State", he examines the term "right", he examines the term "the people", he examines both "to keep" and "to bear", and he examines the word "Arms." So far he hasn't scrutinized the word "security", but I'm only halfway through.
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.
He examines the phrase "well regulated", he examines the term "Militia", he examines the term "State", he examines the term "right", he examines the term "the people", he examines both "to keep" and "to bear", and he examines the word "Arms." So far he hasn't scrutinized the word "security", but I'm only halfway through.
I've always understood that use of the term state the same way. The 2nd Amendment appears to take the value and importance of the security of our polity - our organized society - as a given. In fact, the preamble of the Constitution - its "mission statement", if you will - includes "establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, [and] promote the general Welfare" as goals of the whole thing. It seems to me that guns, far from providing for our security in the US today, are among the greatest and gravest of threats to the security of our free state - our polity. Guns today promote injustice, compromise domestic tranquility, threaten the common defense, and encumber the general welfare. (I was about to close that sentence with "...to the tune of 40,000 lives a year", but of course the number of dead is only part of the story. The actual cost of gun violence to the security of our free state is much, much higher than that.)Justice Scalia said:The phrase "security of a free state" meant "security of a free polity", not security of each of the several States as the dissent below argued. Joseph Story wrote in his treatise on the Constitution that "the word 'state' is used in various senses [and in] its most enlarged sense, it means the people composing a particular nation or community." [...] It is true that the term "State" elsewhere in the Constitution refers to individual States, the phrase "security of a free state" and close variations seem to have been terms of art in 18th-century political discourse, meaning a "free country" or free polity.