Some people insist that the government has no right to regulate guns at all, since the United States Constitution guarantees them the right to "keep and bear arms". Tell them you don't see why a private citizen needs automatic weapons, and they become true patriots. What we might do is redefine "arms", since "guns" aren't mentioned in the Second Amendment. We could become "strict constructionists" and decide that "arms" means "small arms"; or we could become "original intenters" and decide that the framers must have meant only muskets and flintlock rifles.
If I have a "take" on the Constitution, it's that the Constitution is a written statute, and that it says what it says--no "interpretation"--it's in English. No "reading into it"--we write things down partly to make this impossible, or at least difficult. No "framer's intent". The intent of some of the most eloquent people who have ever lived is clear in the document. Any case that can't be made using the words as written needs to become a case for an amendment, not an "interpretation". You might call me a literalist, who would tell the gun lobby: " it says arms, but never mentions guns".
No comments:
Post a Comment