Local opinion: What's in an interpretation?

When I was stationed in Japan, I worked directly for my First Sergeant. While discussing my primary duties one day, he asked me to read a passage from the reg that covers most of my duties. When I was done, I said, “I read that to mean,” and he stopped me right there. He said, “Don’t tell me what you think it means. Tell me what it says.” I have been working that way ever since.

A letter writer in talked about an interpretation of the 2nd Amendment in its full text by the Supreme Court of the United States. He said the first part reading “A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state,” was missed or ignored by the NRA and automatic-weapon advocates. I don’t think it was. I also don’t think he knows what the definition of militia is.

The Militia Act of 1903 says that every able-bodied man of 17 and under 45 years of age who is not a member of the National Guard or Naval Militia is a member of the militia. Remember the draft? Trust me when I say, the NRA and SCOTUS did not ignore that part of the 2nd Amendment.

The author also wants SCOTUS to force all gun owners to attend military/militia type training yearly. Basically bringing back the draft. SCOTUS can’t force anyone to attend such training. He also says that non-attendance would result in gun confiscation. A clear violation of the second part of the 2nd amendment, “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” Period!

In his letter, the author mentions advocates of automatic weapons. The thing about that is, so few people own automatic weapons. It requires a class 3 license, which is extremely expensive and hard to get. Just the background check alone can take 7 months. The cost of the gun alone can be well over $20,000. The permit will add another $200 to that and there is no promise BATF will approve it. If not approved, you do not get the $200 back. I think he meant to say semiautomatic weapons. There is a big difference.

Remember me saying, “Read without interpretation”? That’s why the Founding Fathers wrote the Bill of Rights in plain simple English. They used simple words for their meaning and to reduce misinterpretation. It was written that way so that regular people of that time could understand it. SCOTUS has ruled in favor of the 2nd Amendment as it reads time and time again.

If you want to know more about “Militia”, I suggest Wikipedia. Reading the actual text of the Militia Act of 1903 will cure insomnia.