English Grammar and the Second Amendment

While browsing through an article discussing the collective versus the individual translations of the Second Amendment, I was struck by the curious capitalization used in the example provided: "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."I wondered if this was how it was actually written. I did some research.

I found that the amendment had been proposed in two forms to two different bodies. The version ratified by the states and authenticated by Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson reads:

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 version passed by Congress is the form that I had seen:

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.

Next I rechecked my understanding of the rules of capitalization. Here are two of the (many) rules:

"Capitalize federal or state when used as part of an official agency name or in government documents where these terms represent an official name. If they are being used as general terms, you may use lowercase letters."

"Proper nouns (the names of specific people, places, organizations, and sometimes things), eg: Golden Gate Bridge, Tony Blair."

It is clear that the meaning of each form of the Second Amendment is changed by the comma and the capitalization. In the first, capitalized “State” specifies one state, the United States and capitalized ‘Arms’ specifies one particular set of arms, those utilized by the United States. The comma in the first edition maintains the reference to the official armed forces of the United States.

The second, non-capitalized no comma version has an entirely different meaning and refers to the individual people and states when speaking of the right to bear arms.

Which form, then, is the "official" form? The constitution provides rules for passing an amendment. In effect, it must be ratified by both of the above mentioned official bodies, by Congress and by three quarters of the states. Therefore, as the same amendment was not ratified by both official bodies, the Second Amendment should be considered null.

But for those who do not accept this position, and choose to regard the Second Amendment as valid, note that the official hand written copy in the National Archives is the version passed by Congress, complete with capitalizations and comma after Militia. For those who choose to translate the Amendment literally, it must be read to specify one State (the United States), one Militia, and the Arms of that body.

(also see Arthur Leiber; New York Times: Constitution Confusion)

Don't Ignore The Elephant

I’m writing to talk about the enormous elephant in the room - but I must speak softly for fear someone will shoot it.

The elephant, of course, is gun control. No one sees the elephant - or at least most pretend they don’t see the elephant - despite the growing episodes of mass shootings.

In 2013 there were 365 mass shootings, one per day. Don’t believe it? Look it up.  But no one is talking about it.

Political fear has hushed mouths in Congress and in the White House, despite President Obama’s rhetoric in his 2013 State of the Union Speech. His 2014 speech contained just two sentences on the subject. Admittedly, those sentences were strong ones, stating an intention to bypass Congress to enact legislation. But will it happen? Or will fear for the electoral future of the Democratic party prevent it?

But we can’t sit and point fingers at the President about this issue. Nor is it us against the NRA. Despite its leadership, the NRA is made up of good people; our neighbors and friends. They own guns, respect the guns, and are horrified at these shootings, just like the rest of us. But their leadership has convinced them that ANY restriction to firearms, any limit to those who should own them or when they may use them, any common sense approach will ultimately lead to the government taking away their guns. As long as fear reigns, nothing will be done.

The NRA leadership responses - increased training in gun handling,  more armed guards in schools, the creation of a national database of the mentally ill, and eliminating violent games, movies and other media - will not prevent these tragedies. If a person is intent upon causing grievous harm with a gun in a public place, there is no way to stop this person, so long as that person is armed. Like computer viruses, clever defenses only lead to even more clever attacks.

My point is this. The American people need to stop pretending we don’t see the elephant. We need to talk about it, to toss out ideas, to suggest solutions, to keep the dialogue going. This is real. Our children are threatened in their schools, families are threatened at the mall, people are threatened anywhere they congregate.

The elephant will not wander away on its own.