The Second Amendment, Then and Now

The Bill of Rights, which includes the first ten of the amendments to the Constitution, was first proposed to Congress by James Madison as articles to be incorporated into the main body of the Constitution.

Congress approved twelve articles of amendment to the Constitution in 1789 and submitted them to the states for ratification. Contrary to Madison’s proposal, they were submitted as “supplemental” additions. Articles Three through Twelve were ratified by the required number of states and became Amendments One through Ten in 1791.

The Second Amendment, which has become a matter of considerable interest in recent years, reads as follows:

“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.”

This was not controversial at the time. The concept existed in English common law long before the enactment of the Bill of Rights. And for a variety of reasons today many Americans feel it is necessary to own firearms.

The importance of this issue to the founders was quite clear. James Madison introduced the language that became the Second Amendment and also wrote: “The Constitution preserves the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation where the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.”

Alexander Hamilton, like Madison a strong advocate for Federalism, was equally explicit: “The constitution shall never be construed…to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms.”

Thomas Jefferson famously said: “No freeman shall be debarred the use of arms.” And he also wrote that “The strongest reason for the people to retain their right to keep and bear arms is as a last resort to protect themselves against tyranny in government.”

During the years leading up to the Revolutionary War there was mob violence in several of the colonies. In addition, many American lived in or close to wilderness regions where conditions were essentially lawless. The need people felt to protect their families was quite rational.

It should be noted that a primary motivation for supporting “a well regulated Militia,” articulated in the Second Amendment as “being necessary to the security of a free State,” was the strong opposition among the founders to the concept of a standing army.

Thomas Jefferson put it this way: “None but an armed nation can dispense with a standing army. To keep ours armed and disciplined is therefore at all times important.” “Every citizen should be a soldier,” he wrote. “This was the case with the Greeks and Romans, and must be that of every free state.”

The American reality in 1776 and 1791 was entirely different from that confronting us today. Yet, news of social, religious, and psychopathic violence imposes itself on us every day. Older Americans are particularly sensitized to what has changed: the radical loss of trust and the lack of civility, ethical integrity, and social responsibility we see everywhere.

We must acknowledge the compelling reasons why so many feel it necessary to own firearms.

That said, however, I must tell you I believe the use of force among Americans today, in defense of the Constitution and the American freedoms, would be counterproductive and incompatible with an effective strategy.

Our consideration in recent posts of the dynamic relation of means to ends should, in my view, make this clear.

Violence committed by Americans against Americans would contradict the rationale behind the impetus to violence itself. It would be self-contradictory, pitting brother and sister against brother and sister, subverting the integrity and viability of the American Idea as a guiding force for the good.

We can do far better.

I have presented principles supporting this assertion in previous posts, (see especially Nov 28 and Dec 12), and will offer a more explicit argument next week.

We need to consider this carefully and get it right. We face a long crisis. Many dark and dangerous things are possible.

Tom

Next week: Principled Means, Principled Ends

Note to readers: You can support this blog and the book project by suggesting that your friends and associates take a look.

First Principle

If we are to rebuild the foundations of this nation in a manner consistent with principle, it will be wise to employ means that lead effectively to the ends we seek. Let us proceed with wisdom and foresight rather than emotion and ego.

Nothing will cause greater destruction to our purpose than a combative attitude that alienates the very people we need to win over.

If we avoid allowing our differences to tear us apart, we can choose to cooperate in addressing the structural problems that threaten the safety and security of our communities. And, it is only in the context of personal relationships tasked with essential responsibilities that we can come to understand and influence one another.

As long-time readers know, I have urged that we turn away from the dysfunction, dishonesty, and deceit of national politics to the extent possible, and join with one another to rebuild America in our local communities.

I have described three essential elements – trust, dependability, and constructive action – which will be necessary to regain stability and to move us forward. These elements will only be found in communities where neighbors rise above their differences to serve a higher purpose.

I have chosen the term “constructive action” to describe the means by which we can realistically progress. And I have explained in recent posts why a shared sense of purpose will be required to guide constructive action.

Shared purpose, I wrote, is a lens through which the challenges of necessity can be brought into focus. The efforts of diverse personalities can be coordinated. Purpose provides a standard by which to determine priorities and judge progress. In short, forward motion is essential; yet it is impossible without unity of purpose.

So, how can we understand constructive action?

Constructive action is action based on the refusal to do harm. It is action taken in a spirit of respectful kindness, a spirit founded upon the refusal to fight, to kill, or to damage. The principle here is the refusal to hurt – by impatience, dishonesty, hatred, or wishing ill of anybody.

I submit to you that this is the first principle upon which all other values, principles, and purposes depend.

Please do not misinterpret constructive action as merely a negative state of harmlessness. Quite the contrary, while constructive action in its purest form attempts to treat even the evil-doer with good-will, it by no means assists the evil-doer in doing wrong or tolerates wrong-doing in any way.

The state of constructive action requires that we resist what is wrong and disassociate ourselves from it even if doing so antagonizes the wrong-doer.

There is a close relationship between the positive spirit of kindness, respect, and trustworthiness that characterizes constructive action and the moral integrity of the free society we wish to build. The two are inseparable.

Constructive action is the means. Unity of purpose, grounded in the truthfulness of moral integrity, is the end.

Western political thinking has always considered means to be either an abstraction of tactics or simply the character of social and political machinery. In both cases means are considered only in their service to the desired ends, or goals, of particular political interests. We will approach our understanding of means in quite a different way, replacing an end-serving with an end-creating function.

Such an approach to means is necessary if we seek to apply traditional American values to rapidly changing circumstances.

This is the reason for my insistence on the meaningful engagement of all Americans in this endeavor, despite our vast diversity. A genuinely American future can only be realized in the context of our differences.

I believe this is what America has always been about. Is it what we want now, or not?

We have a clear choice to make. Either we choose to recover and reconstruct the fundamental meaning of the American Idea, or we can walk away forever from the safety, stability, and meaning of an America we can trust and believe in.

Tom

A note to readers: The next several posts will explore the meaning and implications of this “first principle.” I will take a breather for the holidays, so please look for the next post on January 2-4: “The Second Amendment, Then and Now”.

A Severe Choice

The confluence of crises confronting the American people in this new century represents a profound turning point in the nation’s history, and for each of us personally.

In the turbulence of multiple crises it can be easy to forget the unique stature of the United States and the role it has played and will continue to play in the progress of an ever-advancing civilization.

The American Idea has been a beacon of hope for the world, however imperfect the reality might be. America has been an intense source of intellectual and creative vibrancy, and has served as a model of political freedom, social diversity, and economic vitality.

Many new readers have started following this blog, particularly on the Facebook page. So, I will pause this week to clarify my purpose.

I have been presenting ideas concerning the motives and principles and discipline I believe we will need to successfully rebuild the foundation of the United States as a free and democratic republic. During the holiday period I will be focused on the importance of ensuring that our means are consistent with the ends we desire.

Some of you will find these ideas familiar, especially those who are rooted in a religious tradition. However, I will propose thinking that I hope will be meaningful to everyone, religious and non-religious alike.

The opening words of this post were lifted from the first chapter of the book I am working on, and I offer more of the same passage below.

The United States has entered the fiery test of a crucible in which the forces of crisis will burn away the self-centeredness and sloppy thinking of the past to forge an American identity we can feel good about.

Or, if we fail to rise to our calling, the social violence arising from failing institutions and human suffering will incinerate our children’s future and turn a great vision to hopelessness and anguish.

At a time of extraordinary existential threat we are confronted with a severe choice.

Will we return to the founding principles of these United States as the bedrock on which to build a free, ethical, and comfortable future? Will we defend and protect two hundred years of commitment, hard work, and sacrifice by generations of Americans who have given their lives to this unprecedented vision?

Or, will we give way to the emotions of uncompromising partisanship – and allow a great trust to shatter and vanish?

Infrastructure, systems, and services we have long depended upon are going to fail in the coming years. Problems will have to be solved without many of the tools and supports to which we are accustomed.

So, let us set aside partisanship and sectarian differences when necessary, in the interest of stabilizing and rebuilding the nation. Panic neither serves nor becomes us.

This nation has progressed gradually toward maturity, dedicated to the cause of liberty built upon the foundation of unity within diversity – diversity of nationality, religion, ethnicity, and, most of all, political philosophy.

We possess wide ranging distinctions and differences, but together we share an essential inviolable common ground.

Let us pull together, reorient ourselves to the originating principles upon which this country was built, and step forward to reassert the vision and secure our communities.

I submit to you that something far better, far nobler, something perhaps beyond our present capacity to imagine, will emerge from the present turmoil.

If, however, we cannot work effectively to build safe communities with people we are not in complete agreement with, then we will be condemned to the only possible alternative: a collapsing civilization characterized by fear and violence, a nightmare for our children, and a land where no principles, no values, no stable order can be realized.

Tom

Next week: First Principles

A House Divided…

Soldier 3

“A house divided against itself cannot stand.”

–Abraham Lincoln

It’s Not Enough…

Vista 7

“It’s not enough that we do our best; sometimes we have to do what’s required.”

–Winston Churchill

Until It’s Done

People 15

“It always seems impossible until it’s done.”
–Nelson Mandela

“People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.”
–George Bernard Shaw

“No pessimist ever discovered the secret of the stars, or sailed to an uncharted land, or opened a new doorway for the human spirit.”
–Helen Keller

Trust

People 13

“Trust is the glue of life. It’s the most essential ingredient in effective communication. It’s the foundational principle that holds all relationships.”

–Stephen Covey

Doing What’s Necessary

Farm 10

“Start by doing what’s necessary; then do what’s possible; and suddenly you are doing the impossible.”

–Francis of Assisi

Knowing Is Not Enough

Horses 5

“Knowing is not enough; we must apply. Being willing is not enough; we must do.”

–Leonardo da Vinci

Morally Responsible

Coast 10

“I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do.”

–Robert A. Heinlein

Perfection of Means, Confusion of Aims

Waterfall 1

“It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity….

“A perfection of means, and confusion of aims, seems to be our main problem.”

Albert Einstein