OK we all know that the whole “Collective Right” argument about the 2nd Amendment is bullshit. First just the THEORY of a “Collective Right” makes about as much sense as an MC Escher painting. Of course if you want an expert legal analysis you can read one here, don’t go looking at the biologist for that stuff.
Still the gut-wrenching stories from this post bring to mind the cries of the antis during the height of that “Collective Right” period.
“Well if you want to have guns, join the army!”
That’s the core of the “Collective Rights” argument. “A Well Regulated Militia…” means to them “A Heavily Restricted Army”.
But of course if the members of the US Armed Forces are the only ones with a 2nd Amendment right, then why is it they spend so little time actually keeping and bearing arms?
Yeah.
I find it interesting the people pushing the collective right argument fail to acknowledge a few facts.
The analogy to 1st Amendment rights; how would that work with the ‘right to assemble’?
If you are already part of a group, you can assemble but individuals can be prevented from joining an assembly?
The legislative function of the federal government still hasn’t changed the laws concerning the militia — so under many circumstances, we should still be requiring people to own a working firearm and ammunition. Now there is an individual mandate I can get behind.
The bottom line is there is no such thing as a “Collective Right” there is only “You” and “I”, never do we ever join in an “Us”. We never relinquish our individuality no matter how we choose to associate.
I’m a militia of one.