• The abortion non-issue
• A new kind of surge
• Congrats Cap'n!
• Game over, man!
• Regarding Education
• Trivia Question of the Day
• What Right to Privacy?
• John McCain is 72 years old! [laughter, applause]
• Bug Braaaaaaaaaains!
• Sarah Palin
• Reich's advice to Democrats
• Women's Lib
• On Barak Obama and Joe Biden
• Late Night Punchline Imbalance: the details undermine the headline
• Better questions about climate change

• September 2008
• August 2008
• July 2008
• June 2008
• May 2008
• April 2008
• March 2008
• February 2008
• January 2008
• November 2007
• October 2007
• September 2007
• August 2007
• July 2007
• June 2007
• May 2007
• April 2007
• March 2007
• February 2007
• January 2007
• December 2006
• November 2006
• October 2006
• September 2006
• August 2006
• July 2006
• June 2006
• May 2006
• April 2006
• March 2006
• February 2006
• January 2006
• December 2005
• November 2005
• October 2005
• September 2005
• August 2005
• July 2005
• June 2005

« Heller and Scalia | Main | Crying won’t help you, Praying won’t do you no good »

Original Intent

I have begged for anybody who believes that the Second Amendment addresses a collective right to explain their reasoning in light of the fact that the phrase “right of the people” is not used anywhere else in the Constitution to reference collectively held rights.

I now have another question for those who do not believe that the Second Amendment was originally intended to apply to an individual’s right to possess firearms and use them for personal self defense. In the late 18th century, how would a person – an individual – protect oneself from armed assailants or greater numbers? This isn’t just a point about life on the frontier… there were no police forces in the cities, Thomas Hobbes notwithstanding. So if your argument is that the Framers did not intend to secure the right of an individual to keep and bear arms, how would the Framers defend their persons? What would they exhort me to do if a handful of thugs were banging on my door and threatening my family?

I’m asking because I don’t understand what you think, and I would like to.

Addendum: We're a small enough blog - and with mostly libertarian readership - that I expect the question to go unanswered if it is only posted here. So I'm posing the question to Tony Campbell in the comments section of his article, A Supreme Mistake - Part II. I have no idea the level to which he can bring satisfaction, or even whether he will try, but I am hopeful that it will be a start.