Federalist Paper #29

I have waited for a long time to see if all these so-called scholars would hit upon something from the days of our founding as a country.

Now we have had another round of violence and the result is the usual reaction. The rash of shootings and the debate and opinion spewed on guns is running full tilt boogie….as usual lots of talk and no action…..the same talk that has been raging for decades….the same inaction…the same lip service.

I recently wrote a piece that I said would be my last word on guns….well no surprise….I LIED!

But before those gun nuts hiding in the ink of blogs let me assure you that this is just a reminder of what a Founding Father had to say about guns. Remember this is what a Founder wrote……a historic document…..Federalist Paper No. 29……not me!

THE power of regulating the militia, and of commanding its services in times of insurrection and invasion are natural incidents to the duties of superintending the common defense, and of watching over the internal peace of the Confederacy. It requires no skill in the science of war to discern that uniformity in the organization and discipline of the militia would be attended with the most beneficial effects, whenever they were called into service for the public defense. It would enable them to discharge the duties of the camp and of the field with mutual intelligence and concert an advantage of peculiar moment in the operations of an army; and it would fit them much sooner to acquire the degree of proficiency in military functions which would be essential to their usefulness. This desirable uniformity can only be accomplished by confiding the regulation of the militia to the direction of the national authority. It is, therefore, with the most evident propriety, that the plan of the convention proposes to empower the Union “to provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, RESERVING TO THE STATES RESPECTIVELY THE APPOINTMENT OF THE OFFICERS, AND THE AUTHORITY OF TRAINING THE MILITIA ACCORDING TO THE DISCIPLINE PRESCRIBED BY CONGRESS.” Of the different grounds which have been taken in opposition to the plan of the convention, there is none that was so little to have been expected, or is so untenable in itself, as the one from which this particular provision has been attacked. If a well-regulated militia be the most natural defense of a free country, it ought certainly to be under the regulation and at the disposal of that body which is constituted the guardian of the national security. If standing armies are dangerous to liberty, an efficacious power over the militia, in the body to whose care the protection of the State is committed, ought, as far as possible, to take away the inducement and the pretext to such unfriendly institutions. If the federal government can command the aid of the militia in those emergencies which call for the military arm in support of the civil magistrate, it can the better dispense with the employment of a different kind of force. If it cannot avail itself of the former, it will be obliged to recur to the latter. To render an army unnecessary, will be a more certain method of preventing its existence than a thousand prohibitions upon paper.

https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed29.asp

Please read it before going off half cocked.

But as usual Americans are too lazy to read the information they want the short version……https://www.gradesaver.com/the-federalist-papers/study-guide/summary-essay-29

The Constitution does not guarantee the ownership of an assault weapon.

Can we please stop pretending that the Second Amendment contains an unfettered right for everyone to buy a gun? It doesn’t, and it never has. The claims made by the small number of extremists, before and after the Orlando, Fla., massacre, are based on a deliberate lie. The Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution doesn’t just say Congress shall not infringe the right to “keep and bear arms.” It specifically says that right exists in order to maintain “a well-regulated militia.” Even the late conservative Supreme Court Associate Justice Antonin Scalia admitted those words weren’t in there by accident. Oh, and the Constitution doesn’t just say a “militia.” It says a “well-regulated” militia.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/what-americas-gun-fanatics-wont-tell-you-2016-06-14

8 years ago I wrote a post on why I thought the 2nd was added….. https://lobotero.com/2013/01/30/why-the-2nd/

I have said many times that I am pro-gun…I have many weapons and still I believe that we need a more intelligent set of gun laws.

Be Smart!

Learn Stuff!

“Lego Ergo Scribo”

5 thoughts on “Federalist Paper #29

  1. Excellent post on the subject, chuq. From your previous 8-years-ago post.. I rather like this angle…
    “I do not believe the 2nd was about protecting citizens from the government but rather protecting the government from its citizens……….”

    I am not any authority on the Federalist Papers but I do like this one.

    1. This is where the media has done great damage…they have defined things…..defined to get the most airtime…..not that the definition is accurate. chuq

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.