BECAUSE THE LEFT HAS TO LIBERATE THE MEANS FROM THE ENDS:

A liberal's lament: The NRA might be right after all (Jonathan Turley, 10/04/07, USA Today)

Principle is a terrible thing, because it demands not what is convenient but what is right. It is hard to read the Second Amendment and not honestly conclude that the Framers intended gun ownership to be an individual right. It is true that the amendment begins with a reference to militias: "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." Accordingly, it is argued, this amendment protects the right of the militia to bear arms, not the individual.

Yet, if true, the Second Amendment would be effectively declared a defunct provision. The National Guard is not a true militia in the sense of the Second Amendment and, since the District and others believe governments can ban guns entirely, the Second Amendment would be read out of existence.

More important, the mere reference to a purpose of the Second Amendment does not alter the fact that an individual right is created.

He, of course, has the matter precisely backwards, but that's what the liberalism requires. In fact, the amendments must all be read and limited in light of the purposes enunciated in the text:

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

And the Second is the most limited because its purposes are explicitly delineated.

Posted by Orrin Judd at October 5, 2007 12:00 AM