Sorry, no. It may have been used that way in a limited sense, but that isn't what it was for. I suspect the author has Bellesiles (author of the groundbreaking and thoroughly discredited "Arming America") disease.
I think we can pretty reliably determine the goals of the time something was legislated by the personal writings of people involved in the process. Same for the Federalist (and Anti-Federalist) Papers; I just don't go by those because every single damn Founder had a different idea. But the government of the state of GA was unanimous in their decisions on the subject for why militia should exist. The Georgia statutes on the subject are something that has been taught in the state history classes for decades. It's not new.
We spoke for everything below Virginia. And our delegates' voice on the 2nd Amendment were the loudest at the Convention. See the Federalist and Anti-Federalist Papers for details on that. It was Southern arguments that persuaded - or there would have been no ratification.
I don't consider founder intent to be all that important when deciding which policies to keep around, because I consider the actual impact of our governmental decisions to be way more important than obedience to the opinions of a bunch of men who envisioned a country where only white men could vote and other human beings could be property. However. A lot of people think it's super important that we always consider what the founders were trying to do, and this is the kind of shit a lot of them don't want to see.
Still! Sort of puts into context the fact that we didn't hear the NRA calling for better-armed black youth after Trayvon Martin was murdered, doesn't it?
I don't consider founder intent to be all that important when deciding which policies to keep around, because I consider the actual impact of our governmental decisions to be way more important than obedience to the opinions of a bunch of men who envisioned a country where only white men could vote and other human beings could be property.
True! But when discussing a policy that has no valid modern purpose, utility, or moral value, it's often useful to check if it *ever* had a valid purpose, utility, or moral value.
And the second amendment, according to the people who wrote it, didn't.
I prefer this reasoning, but either way, they both fall back upon "we need private citizens to be armed because if we need to call up a militia, we don't want to have to arm them" which, really, has got fuck all to do with protecting yourself from tyrannical government, since doing it is to fulfill a government need.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2013-01-17 08:33 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2013-01-17 10:03 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2013-01-17 10:51 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2013-01-18 12:59 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2013-01-18 02:24 am (UTC)I suspect the author has Bellesiles (author of the groundbreaking and thoroughly discredited "Arming America") disease.
(no subject)
Date: 2013-01-18 02:50 am (UTC)By this same 'logic', the purpose of the interstate system is Hitler.
(no subject)
Date: 2013-01-18 01:53 pm (UTC)That might be record, even for you!
(no subject)
Date: 2013-01-18 07:54 pm (UTC)I think we can pretty reliably determine the goals of the time something was legislated by the personal writings of people involved in the process. Same for the Federalist (and Anti-Federalist) Papers; I just don't go by those because every single damn Founder had a different idea. But the government of the state of GA was unanimous in their decisions on the subject for why militia should exist. The Georgia statutes on the subject are something that has been taught in the state history classes for decades. It's not new.
(no subject)
Date: 2013-01-19 08:32 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2013-01-20 03:07 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2013-01-19 02:51 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2013-01-18 03:08 am (UTC)Still! Sort of puts into context the fact that we didn't hear the NRA calling for better-armed black youth after Trayvon Martin was murdered, doesn't it?
(no subject)
Date: 2013-01-18 02:19 pm (UTC)True! But when discussing a policy that has no valid modern purpose, utility, or moral value, it's often useful to check if it *ever* had a valid purpose, utility, or moral value.
And the second amendment, according to the people who wrote it, didn't.
(no subject)
Date: 2013-01-18 06:19 pm (UTC)http://www.angrybearblog.com/2013/01/the-problem-with-second-amendment.html