XPost: can.talk.guns, alt.guns, alt.rec.guns
XPost: talk.politics.guns
From: Nope@noway.net
Leif wrote:
> On Sep 18, 10:23 am, Magus wrote:
>> Leif wrote:
>>> On Sep 17, 3:03 pm, "RSweeney" wrote:
>>>> "Leif" wrote in message
>>>>> Leif speaking: "The people" referred to in the 2nd Amendment was the
>>>>> well regulated militia. The militia of 1789 wasn't just a "resource
>>>>> pool." It was an organized state entity, made up of men capable of
>>>>> bearing arms, enrolled in militia companies for training and service.
>>>> The people referred to in the entire bill of rights is the entire
citizenry.
>>>> Madison could just as easily had used the term "militia" and not people.
>>>> He didn't.
>>> Leif speaking: The word "militia" appears in the Second Amendment.
>>> The word Madison didn't use but could have is "individuals."
>>>> The militia of 1789 was "the whole of the people" as George Mason and
>>>> Patrick Henry (and others) had written and debated.
>>> Leif speaking: In 1789 military context, "the people" were those who
>>> were obligated to militia service under state law. John Adams
>>> explains it:
>>> "The militia comprehends the whole people. By virtue of the laws of
>>> the country, every male inhabitant between sixteen and sixty years of
>>> age, is enrolled in a company, and a regiment of militia completely
>>> organized with all its officers. He is enjoined to keep always in his
>>> house, and at his own expense, a firelock in good order, a powder
>>> horn, a pound of powder, twelve flints, four-and-twenty balls of lead,
>>> a cartridge box, and a knapsack; so that the whole country is ready to
>>> march for its own defence upon the first signal of alarm. These
>>> companies and regiments are obliged to assemble at certain times in
>>> every year, under the orders of their officers, for the inspection of
>>> their arms and ammunition, and to perform their exercises and
>>> manoeuvres." (Appendix to A Defence of the Constitutions of Government
>>> of the United States of America, John Adams, 1787)
>> Wrong there Leif; your cite doesn't support your assertion.
>>
>> Your cite demonstrates the militia is the whole people [every one of
>> them] and only a subset [male, between sixteen and sixty] is required to
>> do certain things by law.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> Leif speaking: What Adams meant by "The militia comprehends the whole
> people" obviously was that all classes in the society were required to
> serve in the militia.
>
Obvious to those with an agenda perhaps, however, I suggest that rather
than try to read meaning into the sentence, let's use a dictionary from
as near the time it was written as we can and see what the word
"comprehend" meant then. That way we may get the correct meaning *out*
of it.
Dr. Johnson's 1755 dictionary of the English language is the reference I
have that is near to the time so I'll use it. It defines COMPREHEND as
"To Comprise; to include; to contain in the mind; to understand; to
conceive".
The first sense listed was "to comprise", Doc Johnson's dictionary
defines "To COMPRISE" as "to contain; to include".
The second sense listed for COMPREHEND was "to include"; ol' Doc
Johnson's dictionary defines this one as "to inclose; to shut in; to
comprise; to comprehend".
Now, again examine Mr. Adams' sentence, "The militia comprehends the
whole people", and tell us what it means.
> Adams' statement tells us who serves in militia units: all males
> between 16 and 60. If there are others in the militia that he chooses
> not to mention, they would have to be females, boys under 16, and men
> over 60. We could call that the "unmentioned militia."
>
That wouldn't work since he already said "The militia comprehends the
whole people"--it would be more accurate to call it the "unorganized
militia". [I know I've heard that term before somewhere...]
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
