Tampa Bay Times: ‘Shall Not Be Infringed’ Does NOT Mean What It Says

By AWR Hawkins

Shall Not Be Infringed
Shall Not Be Infringed
AmmoLand Gun News
AmmoLand Gun News

Washington DC – -(Ammoland.com)- On March 26 2015, the Tampa Bay Times responded to the numerous pro-Second Amendment bills making their way through the Florida legislature by suggesting that “gun rights are not absolute.”

In other words, “shall not be infringed” does not mean “shall not be infringed.”

According to the Times, the numerous gun rights bills–especially campus carry–show that Republican legislators are controlled by the NRA and do not understand that if certain limits are not placed on Second Amendment rights, public safety is sacrificed.

In an attempt to prove this premise, they touch on the “contrived” arguments for campus carry, arguments that rest on the idea of armed women stopping “murderers and rapists.”

The problem with this line of thinking is that conservatives believe women are as capable of stopping murderers and rapists as men are, given one important tool…a gun. Conservatives do not agree with the Times, Salon, Shannon Watts, Moms Demand Action, Everytown for Gun Safety, and others who [are paid to] or pretend the idea of arming women is foolish.

Their attackers are armed, so why not level the playing field?

Yet to be fair, the Times‘ opposition to campus carry goes deeper than the simplistic view that women cannot handle being armed. Their opposition ultimately rests on their conviction that “gun rights are not absolute,” the belief that the phrase “shall not be infringed” does not mean shall not be infringed at all.

In this, they are mistaken.

On March 18, Breitbart News reported on an October 1788 letter James Madison wrote to Thomas Jefferson–a letter in which Madison explained that certain rights needed to be hedged in by a Bill of Rights because they were “essential.” Among those “essential” rights was the right to keep and bear arms. Madison wrote that hedging gun rights in would protect the exercise of those rights from the “whims” of the “majority.”

These very “whims” are on display when the Times points to groups that oppose campus carry, groups that oppose the open carry of firearms during a disaster, and groups that oppose the legality of carrying firearms in one’s car without a permit. In doing these things, they want to give the impression that the “majority” opposes expanding the exercise of Second Amendment rights.

But Madison’s message is clear: we are not to be concerned with the “whims” of the “majority,” be that majority real or imagined. Rather, the majority is concerned with protecting and enjoying the exercise of the right to keep and bear arms.

Follow AWR Hawkins on Twitter @AWRHawkins.

Subscribe
Notify of
16 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
ole Shoemaker
ole Shoemaker
5 years ago

Think the second someone introduced a bill in Congress that the “media” had to tell the truth when they reported, that they would not be squealing like little pigs to the high heavens they don’t believe in !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I don’t read anything in the First that says you can lie to everybody and call it facts !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

ole Shoemaker
ole Shoemaker
5 years ago

First thing is stop buying these papers and tell them why you quit. Also goes for local tv stations. Tell them you are tired of hearing there liberal crap and stop it or you are going to find a news outlet that reports the news and not reports liberal opinions of news events. How about the First Amendment ??? Maybe it is time we start ripping these liberals, papers and tv stations on their free speech??? Like yes, you and I can say anything in conversation to each other, but the First does not allow you to “Print” or “Broadcast”… Read more »

Richard
Richard
6 years ago

The Fundamental INALIENABLE rights were so important (and so easily distorted by despots), that the Founding Fathers in their hard earned WISDOM put down our rights given by our CREATOR in writing as part of our Fundamental Law of the Land. Therefore, any “majority” cannot remove them. No politician can remove them. When they do they break the foundational laws of our USA and open the door for despotism – tyranny. That’s called treason. Today it is rampant. Anyone holding public office swore an oath to uphold the Constitution. Any military and law enforcement officer swore an oath to uphold… Read more »

Ken Kiger
Ken Kiger
6 years ago

Mac Mcntyr is ignorantly exercising his inalienable Right to call the Justices of the United States Supreme Court “uneducated and ill-informed” with this in his posting: “only uneducated ill-informed persons can read the 2nd amendment as a constitutional right to carry a gun for ..SELF-PROTECTION!!!” From D.C. v Heller, the Law of the Land since 2008: At the time of the founding, as now, to “bear” meant to “carry.” See Johnson 161; Webster; T. Sheridan, A Complete Dictionary of the English Language (1796); 2 Oxford English Dictionary 20 (2d ed. 1989) (hereinafter Oxford). When used with “arms,” however, the term… Read more »

Rick Street
Rick Street
6 years ago

Using this lack of logic we could say the First Amendment does not apply to the Drive By Media

jim b
jim b
6 years ago

John you say (Card carrying member) the way this country is going,,,,, a statement like that makes it
sound like carrying a “card” is equatable with carrying a gun????????? I cant believe Obummer has done
so much evil in so little time,,,, He should carry a card to Leavenworth prison!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Mikey
Mikey
6 years ago

These people get their legal training at the same place Sick Willie did: “It depends on what the meaning of “is” is…”

Robert Ross
Robert Ross
6 years ago

There are women in our military that are trained and are very good and expert marksman. Woman should take the same courses as all men take to get a permit . Save for military and police force. They are all ready trained. Are the journalists Constitution lawyers or experts in the 2nd amendment or any of our BILL OF RIGHTS. These are a bunch of balloon brains anti-socialist that KNOW NOTHING !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Al Schmidt
Al Schmidt
6 years ago

Liberals always reinvent the dictionary to suit their lies. The trouble is, they believe their own lies.

mikrat
mikrat
6 years ago
Reply to  Al Schmidt

“Liberals always reinvent the dictionary to suit their lies. The trouble is, they believe their own lies.”

That should read = POLITICIANS, Cops and Lawyer always reinvent the dictionary to suit their lies. The trouble is, they believe their own lies.

David E. Young
David E. Young
6 years ago

The Founders’ understanding: The Meaning of ‘Shall Not Be Infringed’
http://onsecondopinion.blogspot.com/2009/02/meaning-of-shall-not-be-infringed.html

mac mcntyr
mac mcntyr
6 years ago
Reply to  David E. Young

…a well manicured lawn,being necessary for the beautification of the neighborhood,the residents shall have the right to keep and use their own lawnmowers, and no one can infringe on that……that sentence was given to 6th and 9th graders to diagram..(not in a public school)……86% (in high tuition private school) declared the sentence was regarding the well manicured lawn as in” a well regulated militia”…only one student reported that they felt the” infringe” part was the topic… i am as conservative as anyone u know….BUT!!!….. i can read….. only uneducated ill-informed persons can read the 2nd amendment as a constitutional right… Read more »

Richard
Richard
6 years ago
Reply to  mac mcntyr

What?

John
John
6 years ago

It is easy to understand why the anti-gun “folks” do not want to allow this. Universities provide the last bastion of a captive audience where they can brainwash them into believing that only the ignorant own guns. What would happen if a young man found out that his beautiful, intelligent girlfriend was a card-carrying member of the NRA? That would completely destroy their faith in mindlessly accepting everything they are supposed to accept as truth. Now, if they start really thinking and having open-minded debate, it may require their professors to have to rethink their value systems. Liberalism does not… Read more »

Herb
Herb
6 years ago

Ever wonder why liberals lie so much? Ever wonder why liberals fear the truth and its spread? Ever wonder why liberals are so good at lying? Please, don’t confuse me with the truthful facts.

Bruce Andrews
Bruce Andrews
6 years ago
Reply to  Herb

Thank you so much for your comment. Liberals are so brainwashed they believe with all that they have that what they are saying is the truth. Therefore, I propose that liberals would not know the truth if it hit them alongside their head. To discuss anything I repeat anything using commonsense with a liberal will never work, but it is fun some times to see their confusion. I taught for several years at the College level and was amassed at the stupid conclusions liberals come up with when confronted with like irrefutable facts. They always fall back on a lie!