Here's the Second Amendment, put into today's language, in accordance with my understanding of both history and the Constitution:
Because it is absolutely critical that we prevent the militia from being used to oppress the people, or to overthrow the duly appointed government to the detriment of the people, the people shall have the right to own and use any weapon they choose in the defense of their life, liberty and/or property from foreign invasion, criminal action and/or oppression in violation of predetermined constitutional limits. No law written, passed or imposed by any of the constitutional branches of this nation, any of the states or any treaty entered into with any foreign power, which attempts to limit, abridge, alter or remove this right, shall be of any validity.
Did I miss anything?
Some have argued that the Second Amendment is about ensuring we have an armed populous that can form itself into a militia. To do so would not constitute a militia, but an armed mob. Our Second Amendment effectively creates a fourth branch of government, the people, with check and balance authority over the other three branches.
West Valley City
- Doug Robinson: Violence against women is...
- In our opinion: The Affordable Care Act needs...
- Can a news channel 'solve problems'?
- The relationship between religiosity and...
- My view: Balancing personal conviction and...
- My view: A global warming solution to grow...
- Join the discussion: Is feminism misunderstood?
- Lawrence and Windsor won't trump Utah...
- Lawrence and Windsor won't trump Utah... 114
- In our opinion: The Affordable Care Act... 64
- Stuart Reid: Translations of religious... 63
- My view: Balancing personal conviction... 53
- In our opinion: The long-term outlook... 51
- Letter: Policy disagreement 45
- In our opinion: Use market forces and... 35
- My view: A global warming solution to... 35