Second Amendment grammar -- the Framers parsed it one way, but will the Supreme Court agree with their analysis? (UNCLASSIFIED)
Mullins, Bill AMRDEC
Bill.Mullins at US.ARMY.MIL
Wed Mar 19 15:34:39 UTC 2008
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE
> -----Original Message-----
> From: American Dialect Society
> [mailto:ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf Of Dave Wilton
> Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2008 9:29 AM
> To: ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Second Amendment grammar -- the Framers parsed
> it one way, but will the Supreme Court agree with their
> analysis? (UNCLASSIFIED)
>
> ---------------------- Information from the mail header
> -----------------------
> Sender: American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
> Poster: Dave Wilton <dave at WILTON.NET>
> Subject: Re: Second Amendment grammar -- the Framers
> parsed it one way,
> but will the Supreme Court agree with their analysis?
> (UNCLASSIFIED)
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> -----------------
>
> But as the meaning of the Second Amendment is a legal
> question being brought before the Supreme Court, the legal
> status of the National Guard is paramount.
>
> In the eyes of the law, the National Guard is a state militia.
But it is not the _only_ state militia. The militia is, and has been,
that part of the citizenry which is able to bear arms in the defense of
itself.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: American Dialect Society
> [mailto:ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf Of James Smith
> Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2008 7:23 AM
> To: ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Second Amendment grammar -- the Framers parsed
> it one way, but will the Supreme Court agree with their
> analysis? (UNCLASSIFIED)
>
> As you say, "at least legally". When in the Nat'l Guard, I
> had no delusions as to where the money came from and who
> pulled the strings. But then, I was in an artillery battery;
> our state's Nat'l Guard MP battalion was probably a lot more
> serviceable to the Governor.
>
>
> --- Dave Wilton <dave at WILTON.NET> wrote:
>
> > No, exactly the opposite is the case, at least legally. The US
> > Constitution, Article I, Section 8 states, in part, that the US
> > Congress has the power to:
> >
> > "To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the
> laws of the
> > union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;
> >
> > "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".
> >
> > The commanders in chief of the National Guard are the
> governors of the
> > separate states and it is only under limited circumstances
> that they
> > are called up for federal duty. States are also able to
> create their
> > own defense forces that are not subject to federal duty; I
> don't think
> > any state's currently do this, but I can't say for sure.
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: American Dialect Society
> > [mailto:ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf Of James Smith
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 7:50 AM
> > To: ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
> > Subject: Re: Second Amendment grammar -- the Framers parsed it one
> > way, but will the Supreme Court agree with their analysis?
> > (UNCLASSIFIED)
> >
> > Both points well taken. However, the National Guard is
> basically an
> > extension of the federal government; the feds train, arm,
> supply, and
> > provide most of the funding for the Nat'l Guard. Under some
> > circumstances, individual state governors exercise limited command,
> > subject to federal oversight.
> >
> > No one in the National Guard supplies their own arms.
> > (Although I think it is noteworthy that the Battle of Lexington and
> > Concord was precipitated by British forays to capture
> militia supplies
> > rather than any attempt to disarm individuals.)
> >
> > Millions who "bear arms" are under no type of "good order".
> >
> >
> > --- "Mullins, Bill AMRDEC"
> > <Bill.Mullins at US.ARMY.MIL>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
> > > Caveats: NONE
> > >
> > > "Well-regulated" is also subject to historical
> > > misinterpretation. At
> > > the time of its writing, it probably meant "in
> > good
> > > order" or something
> > > like that. It likely didn't mean that it was a
> > > militia subject to a
> > > number of formal regulations
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: American Dialect Society
> > > > [mailto:ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf Of
> > > Jonathan Lighter
> > > > Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 5:27 PM
> > > > To: ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
> > > > Subject: Re: Second Amendment grammar -- the
> > > Framers parsed
> > > > it one way, but will the Supreme Court agree
> > with
> > > their
> > > > analysis? (UNCLASSIFIED)
> > > >
> > > > ---------------------- Information from the mail
> > > header
> > > > -----------------------
> > > > Sender: American Dialect Society
> > > <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
> > > > Poster: Jonathan Lighter
> > > <wuxxmupp2000 at YAHOO.COM>
> > > > Subject: Re: Second Amendment grammar --
> > the
> > > Framers
> > > > parsed it one way,
> > > > but will the Supreme Court agree
> > > with their analysis?
> > > > (UNCLASSIFIED)
> > > >
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > -----------------
> > > >
> > > > It is difficult to argue that the present
> > National
> > > Guard is
> > > > _not_ "a well-regulated militia." Just what
> > that
> > > > interpretation may mean to the import of the
> > > amendment I
> > > > leave to others.
> > > >
> > > > JL
> > > >
> > > > James Smith <jsmithjamessmith at YAHOO.COM> wrote:
> > > > ---------------------- Information from the
> > mail
> > > header
> > > > -----------------------
> > > > Sender: American Dialect Society
> > > > Poster: James Smith
> > > > Subject: Re: Second Amendment grammar -- the
> > > Framers parsed
> > > > it one way, but will the Supreme Court agree
> > with
> > > their analysis?
> > > > (UNCLASSIFIED)
> > > >
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > -----------------
> > > >
> > > > My question is: when are they going to get
> > around
> > > to
> > > > organizing this well-regulated militia? It's
> > been
> > > two-hundred years!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > James D. SMITH |If history teaches anything
> > South
> > > SLC, UT |it
> > > > is that we will be sued
> > jsmithjamessmith at yahoo.com
> > > |whether
> > > > we act quickly and decisively
> > > > |or slowly and cautiously.
> > > >
> > > >
> > __________________________________________________
> > > > Do You Yahoo!?
> > > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> > > protection
> > > > around http://mail.yahoo.com
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > The American Dialect Society -
> > > http://www.americandialect.org
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > __________________________________________________
> > > > Do You Yahoo!?
> > > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> > > protection
> > > > around http://mail.yahoo.com
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > The American Dialect Society -
> > > http://www.americandialect.org
> > > >
> > > >
> > > Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
> > > Caveats: NONE
> > >
> > >
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> > > The American Dialect Society -
> > > http://www.americandialect.org
> > >
> >
> >
> > James D. SMITH |If history teaches
> > anything
> > South SLC, UT |it is that we will
> > be sued
> > jsmithjamessmith at yahoo.com |whether we act
> > quickly and decisively
> > |or slowly and
> > cautiously.
> >
> === message truncated ===
>
>
> James D. SMITH |If history teaches anything
> South SLC, UT |it is that we will be sued
> jsmithjamessmith at yahoo.com |whether we act quickly and decisively
> |or slowly and cautiously.
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> ______________
> ________
> Looking for last minute shopping deals?
> Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
> http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>
>
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE
------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
More information about the Ads-l
mailing list