The Right To Bear Arms

"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."

On Wednesday, June 26, 2008, five Justices of the United States Supreme Court chose to confirm the Second Amendment's subordinate clause- "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"- and to ignore the independent clause- "a well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State."

There is simply no constitutional right to bear arms. None. As written, the right of individuals to keep and bear arms is dependent on a well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state. According to answers.com, the U.S. History Encyclopedia describes a "militia" as

a form of citizen-based defense that shaped early American history and created an American tradition of citizen soldiery. Early American colonies faced dangers from Native American and European foes. Colonial governments quickly established universal military obligation for white males. At its simplest, men were armed or ordered to arm themselves, organized into units, and trained.

Now, of course we have not had such a militia in the U.S.A. in quite some time. Nevertheless, pledging loyalty to the Second Amendment has become a ritual in presidential politics, with the Repub nominee currying favor with the NRA and its followers and the Democratic nominee frightened of a backlash if he should question the relevance of the Amendment in modern America. So if the Second Amendment is sacrosanct, perhaps the right also will demand fealty to the Third Amendment of the United States Constitution:

"No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law."