Rebutting ‘Grammar Argument’ On Second Amendment

By Tom Knighton

Photo via Pixabay

It’s hilarious how many people think they have the “gotcha” on interpreting the Second Amendment.

One such soul wrote a letter to the editor to refute the grammar of the Second Amendment, arguing that how the Founding Fathers phrased absolutely, definitively proves the Second Amendment isn’t an individual right.

Careful grammar, of which the Constitution fathers were experts, offers nothing regarding gun rights of individuals. The sole subject of the Second Amendment is “A well regulated Militia.”

“The people” is not a second subject (there is no “and”). Throughout the Constitution, “the people” is always a collective. For individuals, the words used are citizen, person, member or party.

The letter is about constitutional carry, but I’ve seen this argument made more than once regarding the Second Amendment as a whole.

Let’s start with the phrase “A well-regulated Militia” and go from there. You see, that entire bit is an introductory clause, not a subject. Just because “militia” is a noun doesn’t mean it’s the subject. Instead, it’s a phrase used to preface the rest of the sentence. You can tell because even without it, you still have a complete sentence. “The people’s right to keep and bear arms shall not …Read the Rest

Source:: Bearing Arms