[UtahRSO]

There's an opinion piece in the Salt Lake Tribune today (Sunday 4/15/07) with a bunch of false information about the Second Amendment. The writer uses the old and discredited definition that the militia is only the individual states' National Guard. With the various National Guard units being so easily Federalized, I wonder if this writer really thinks the founding fathers put in the 2nd Amendment to say that "the army has the right to have guns."

http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/ci_5668749

 

[iampacking]

I saw that too--the other thing I didn't like was his lack of recognition that the BOR is guaranteeing us things that have been granted by natural law--the BOR does not itself give us those rights(like 2A).
I was going to leave it to someone more eloquent to respond.
al

 

[Jeff Johnson]

Volunteers? We can't leave this unanswered. I'll compose a letter, but it'll have to wait ... can't do it now.

However, there are at least two very good things to reply with. One is the recent D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that states that the 2nd Amendment is an individual right.

Another is the U.S. Justice Department conclusion that the Second Amendment secures an individual right.

EDIT: I moved this topic to the Guns in the News subforum, as the more appropriate place.