I FOUND Stephen S. Walker’s letter concerning the Second Amendment (“If it’s ‘original intent’ you seek, consider musket,” Dec. 21) to be quite interesting. I have taken the liberty of slightly rewriting it to apply to the First Amendment:
The Boston Globe is one in an illustrious line of Massachusetts newspapers; in fact, the very first newspaper in the British North American colonies was printed in Boston. The publisher used a hand-pulled press.
Comments
This comment has been removed.
Mr. Degrazia seems to miss the point of Mr. Walker's comment. I will presume, for the moment, to have a better understanding of Mr. Walker's point of view.
Since the Conservative wing of the Supreme Court espouses an "originalist" or literal interpretation of the Second Amendment, the Conservative wing should be held to that position. It should be held to the standard of enforcing the entire amendment, not just the part it likes. "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." (Note that bit about a "well regulated Milita" please.)
Apparently the Court disagrees, see Hiller. Most scholars believe that though the framers stated the phrase "well regulated militia...." then stated the "right to bear arms..." that if the reason for the right no longer exists, the right still does.
To finish, the Liberal wing of the current court has never espoused an "originalist" stance on the Constitution. They see the Constitution as a living document that can be amended and interpreted. Besides, there are already some limits on free speech. You can't incite panic, riot or violence, for example.
It is all about technology. If I can "bear arms" as a private citizen, why can I not have a nuke in my house? Why not a RPG? So give them the 1789 musket. otherwise there is no rationale for the current distorted application of the 2nd Amendment. The law was intended to arm a state's militia in the absence of a federal standing army. This stupid lack on the federal level was corrected after the War of 1812. My nutty neighbor with the 15 guns is not part of the National Guard. He should have no right to own anything more than the sacred "founding fathers" intended. Let him have a first class black powder muzzle loader. He can blow himself up with that and leave me alone.
The courts have, over the years, found reasonable restrictions on the bill of rights. For example under the First Amd we are allowed to assemble. The courts have found that the government can place certain restrictions on that right, those are they can regulate the time, place and manner of assembly. It's only reasonable to assume that certain restrictions can be placed on the 2nd Amd, including limiting "nukes." I am all for proper licensing and background checks for purchasing of firearms. More laws and bans probably won't work. Washington, D.C. has the most strict gun control laws in the country but they do little to stop the daily gun murders.
drlloyd: This letter writer nailed it. a musket is used to deliver a lead ball. a modern rifle is used to deliver a lead ball more efficiently. a hand operated printing press is used to ink a page. a modern printing press is used to ink a page more efficiently.
Therefore, a modern rifle and a modern press are real comparators, to the original intent.
Adding wireless and cable braodcast, electonic means and photo printing would be comparable to "Nuke" and RPG's. Thank You for opening the door, however... to proviate ownership of military devices !
HUZZAH !