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.

Second Amendment

Think about how easy this might have been.

The Founders knew how to write. Thomas Jefferson wrote most of the Constitution, meaning he put the general ideas to words. How tough would it have been to write: “The government may not infringe upon the people’s rights to keep and bear arms.” And yet the Founders didn’t write it so simply. Indeed, people often consider the first clause the most important or at least modifying what is to come. So why did the Founders link the security of the free state (Not a free people, a free state), to the people’s right to keep and bear arms?

We won’t know because the Amendment has been construed so poorly over the years. The last major SCOTUS case to address the matter was Heller in 2008. The question in Heller involved a Washington DC municipal code, outlawing most guns in the home. The SCOTUS – in a 5-4 vote said that a state couldn’t regulate all firearms kept in the home.

To avoid Scalia’s lengthy legalese, let’s let Wiki explain Scalia’s majority opinion:

 Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues.

The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.

And now we’re in a place to review Lauren Boebert’s deep thoughts. While reading, keep in mind that Lauren Boebert is just relaying the working assumption of all the ammosexuals on the MAGA right.

The Second Amendment is absolute. Anyone who says otherwise is a tyrant.

— Lauren Boebert (@laurenboebert) April 8, 2021

We suppose that Scalia was a tyrant.

It is a ridiculous statement. Felons lose their rights to ever own or possess a gun, forever. Felons lose their 2nd Amendment “absolute right.” This is unusual. Once a person has served their sentence, parole, fees, etc. one regains their 1st Amendment rights, 4th, 5th, 6th, 8th, 9th, and 14th. These are personal rights and they are absolute, not subject to regulation by the state. The 2nd Amendment is different.

But Lauren Boebert isn’t a scholar in anything but guns, meaning how to use them and how to manipulate them as a political tool, not the law. Again, if the 2nd Amendment was absolute, why are automatic weapons banned? Why were assault weapons once banned? Why are turrets banned? Even in common day usage, we sell “arms” to other countries, why can’t someone own surface to air stinger missiles? Why not a loaded drone? Why not a used F-15?

Because they are not absolute. But Lauren thinks she’s so badass saying it.

****
Peace, y’all
Jason
[email protected] and on Twitter @JasonMiciak