| . |
| [Ed. Bob Sliger says this appeared
in the May 23, 2002 edition of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch in the editorial / commentary section. It could not be found on the stltoday.com web site...] http://www.townhall.com/columnists/calthomas/ct20020516.shtml |
| Cal
Thomas
May 16, 2002 Ashcroft is right on guns Editorials in The
New York Times and The Washington Post denounced Ashcroft as flying
in the face of history and legal precedent. In fact, Ashcroft has the
law and history on his side. Both have recognized not only an
individual's right to keep and bear arms as a last defense against
government tyranny, but in many cases, states have required citizens to
own guns to protect their freedoms and deter criminals.
A reading of The Federalist papers, in which James Madison, Alexander
Hamilton and John Jay expand on the meaning of the Constitution, shows
that the militia the Second Amendment refers to was to be comprised of
armed private citizens. Madison wrote in Federalist
Paper 46 that an armed citizen "forms a barrier against the
enterprise of ambition," which the Founders understood from history
and their "British oppressors" to be overreaching government.
In debate over the Constitution, Samuel Adams sought a guarantee in
the Bill of Rights that "The said Constitution shall never be
construed to authorize Congress to...prevent the people of the United
States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms." At
the Virginia Constitutional Convention, George Mason said Britain had
plotted "to disarm the people - that was the best and most
effective way to enslave them," while Patrick Henry noted,
"The great object is that every man be armed...Everyone who is able
may have a gun."
Richard Henry Lee, a signer of the Declaration of Independence,
proposed that "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."
Many believe the National Guard is the same as a state militia -- a
reserve force trained at federal expense for immediate service in the
event of an emergency. But the militia of which the Founders spoke was
something entirely different. They viewed an armed citizenry that could
be mustered into a fighting force or used to defend the rights and
property of the individual as a last defense against those who would
deny such rights.
In 1982, the U.S. Senate Subcommittee on the Constitution published a
carefully documented report on "The Right to Keep and Bear
Arms," including a history of events leading to passage of the
Second Amendment.
"The right to keep and bear arms as a part of English and
American law antedates not only the Constitution, but also the discovery
of firearms," the report notes. "Under the laws of Alfred the
Great, whose reign began in 872 A.D. all English citizens from the
nobility to the peasants were obliged to privately purchase weapons and
be available for military duty. This was in sharp contrast to the feudal
system as it evolved in Europe, under which armament and military duties
were concentrated in the nobility." While many English rights were
"abridged" over the centuries, the right to bear arms was
mostly retained.
In 1623, Virginia forbade colonists to travel unless they were
"well armed." In 1631, Virginians were required to engage in
target practice on Sunday and "bring their peeces (sic) to
church." By 1658, every Virginian was to have a firearm at home,
and in 1673 state law said that a citizen who claimed he was too poor to
buy a gun "could have one purchased for him by the government,
which would then require him to pay a reasonable price when able to do
so."
When Britain began to increase its military presence in the colonies,
Massachusetts called on its citizens to arm themselves. One colonial
newspaper argued that this was legal, citing Blackstone's commentaries
on English law, which listed "having and using arms for
self-preservation and defense" among the "absolute rights of
individuals."
When New Hampshire cast the ninth vote needed for passage of the
Constitution, it called for a Bill of Rights including the provision
that "Congress shall never disarm any citizen unless such as are or
have been in actual rebellion." The focus was on the law-breaker,
not the law-abiding gun owner, who was seen as a defender of individual
liberty and national freedom.
There is much more documented in the 1982 report (available through
the Government Printing Office or at www.constitution.org/mil/rkba1982.htm#01).
Every citizen should read and study it, including editorial writers and
the Supreme Court. Hard-won rights are not easily restored once they've
been surrendered. ©2002 Tribune Media Services |