Why Are We Arguing Over The Second Amendment?

Jack R. Noel
December 8, 2023

Okay, one more time: 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.

Most states have a version like Michigan’s Section 6: “Every person has a right to keep and bear arms for the defense of himself and the state.”

Elaboration:
The difference between the two is that, at the time, the chief concern was the lack of an organized armed force — for the brand-new United States. Congress had done what it’s still doing: Ignored or put off what it was supposed to be doing. Congress also required some source of funding for everything including the military. They had to create federal tax laws to pay for legitimate services. So using “militia” is why Washington’s Continental Army was composed of militias and a few individual volunteers. This is the most often misunderstood thing about our Second Amendment, which I remind you, is integral to our Bill of Rights.

Remember too the little detail; there was no United States Army or Navy, Marine Corps or Air Force. We pay taxes to sustain our military. But everything had to be created from scratch and ultimately at the village level. I hope this explains “a well-regulated militia being necessary,,,” part.

In other words, without adequately armed civilians, we would not have a free nation today.