Skip to main content

View Diary: Bill Maher on what the Second Amendment crowd is missing (124 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  And it isn't necessary for security (6+ / 0-)

    It's important to note that the first clause of the amendment simply isn't true.  It's false.

    A well-regulated militia is not necessary to the security of a free state.  

    Certainly, the framers thought so, but they had little evidence either way.  Since then, we've seen that with a police force (the police didn't exist in 1789!), and with a standing army (which they didn't care for), you can easily maintain a secure and free state.  You don't need a militia at all, much less a well-regulated one.

    Indeed, many countries have done away with the army, too (Costa Rica is the largest I know of)... yet they are still secure and free.

    Now, the SCOTUS pointed out as much in their Heller decision.  They also pointed out (and rightly so) that the falsehood of the first clause does not automatically invalidate the legal force of the second clause.  

    The question for us is:  The falsehood of the first clause of the second amendment does mean that we should seriously and soberly question whether or not the 2nd Amendment still has a role to play in our Constitution.  

    Conservatives need to realize that their Silent Moral Majority is neither silent, nor moral, nor a majority.

    by nominalize on Sat Jan 19, 2013 at 08:00:23 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site