U.S.A. -(AmmoLand.com)- Tired crank Keith Olbermann reached a new low in weak-minded rhetoric in recent months with his doltish insight into the Second Amendment. According to the former MSNBC bloviator, the Second Amendment does not protect an individual right to own firearms because the word “own” does not appear in the text. Never mind that the amendment affirms the right to “keep and bear” firearms, according to Olbermann’s sophomoric mind, the lack of the word “own” is dispositive.
On April 29, Olbermann tweeted
“The 2nd Amendment is about State Militias, not personal ownership of guns. The word ‘own’ does not appear in it, nor does any synonym for ‘own.’” This was followed by a July 13 tweet that stated, “And ask yourself: why doesn’t the 2nd Amendment have the word ‘own’ in it? The 2nd Amendment does NOT authorize gun OWNERSHIP!” The message was accompanied by a brief video in which Olbermann reasserted his puerile theory from what appeared to be a tony apartment overlooking New York’s Central Park.
Anyone with an elementary grasp of the English language will instantly note that the inclusion of “keep” in the Second Amendment negates Olbermann’s bizarre thesis. The absurdity of the left-wing pundit’s critique is underscored by the entry for “own” in the Merriam-Webster thesaurus, which states, “to keep, control, or experience as one’s own.”
Aside from the manifest stupidity of Olbermann’s claim, consider some of the statements America’s founding fathers made contemporaneous to ratification of the U.S. Constitution. At the Massachusetts ratification convention in 1788, Samuel Adams noted, “The said Constitution [shall] be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms.”
Writing for June 18, 1789, Federal Gazette, Tench Coxe of Pennsylvania explained, “As the military forces which must occasionally be raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirmed by the next article (of amendment) in their right to keep and bear their private arms.”
Also, consider the former sportscaster’s profound arrogance. Much of the 20th century witnessed a vigorous debate in government and the legal academy over the proper interpretation of the Second Amendment. This debate hinged on whether the right to keep and bear arms applied to the “people” (as made clear by the text) or if the amendment concerned the power of states or individuals solely in connection with organized militia service.
The heights of the left-wing legal academy worked for decades to undermine the correct individual right interpretation of the Second Amendment, but at no point was a serious argument put forth that the Second Amendment did not protect individual gun ownership because the word “own” was not in the text. Might, if there was a single shred of merit to Olbermann’s premise, a legal scholar far better educated and more accomplished than the TV personality have proffered the idea? If only the Joyce Foundation or the Brady Campaign had had access to Olbermann’s brilliant constitutional scholarship back in 2008, surely District of Columbia v. Heller would have been decided differently.
Thankfully, with a 99 percent literacy rate in the U.S., the vast majority of Americans have a greater understanding of the Second Amendment than Olbermann.
In April, polling firm McLaughlin & Associates asked voters,
When it comes to the 2nd Amendment, do you agree or disagree with the following statement:
“There is a reason why the founders made the right to bear arms, the 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, right after the 1st Amendment which is freedom of speech. The Founders understood the importance of law-abiding citizens’ right to legally own firearms for things like hunting, sport and personal protection and the 2nd Amendment is one of our most important and cherished civil rights in the U.S. Constitution.”
Voters agreed rather than disagreed with the statement by an overwhelming 73.4 to 18.0 percent margin.
Olbermann attended Cornell University where he obtained a BS in communication. One would presume the coursework for a communications degree would entail speaking and writing in English. It is our sincere hope that this high-profile revelation of an alumnus’ functional illiteracy prompts a reexamination of the curriculum.
About NRA-ILA:
Established in 1975, the Institute for Legislative Action (ILA) is the “lobbying” arm of the National Rifle Association of America. ILA is responsible for preserving the right of all law-abiding individuals in the legislative, political, and legal arenas, to purchase, possess, and use firearms for legitimate purposes as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Visit: www.nra.org
This “argument” comes up a lot, and it may help to understand how the founders drafted the 2nd, and how the Supreme Court has now interpreted it in line with the founders’ intents. There are two clauses in the single sentence of the 2nd. The first clause sets forth the purpose of the right: It says the purpose is to meet the need of a nation of free men for a “well regulated militia.” Here the gun-grabbers say “Aha! The government can regulate guns, and they have to be in a militia!” But that couldn’t be more wrong. The English… Read more »
All true. The argument Olbermann is trying to invoke is an argument put forth in 1972 by Larry Tribe of Harvard Law School. He soon ate his words. Our right to self defense and the means to effect self defense is Biblical. It is a natural right based in Natural Law. Not negotiable.
Dingus is right about one thing: the 2nd Amendment doesn’t authorize gun ownership. In fact, it authorizes nothing. It certainly acknowledges a natural right (the only kind of right, actually) regarding arms, and in so do forbids the government any power to legislate the OWNERSHIP, possession, and use of weapons of war ( those arms). What Dingus also gets wrong is that the government was never meant to own anything. So according to him, nobody owns the weapons, but individuals should keep and maintain and use them, I suppose. How the governments got around the property ownership thing was to… Read more »
What governments get wrong is almost everything, but most especially they forget that laws are nothing but words on paper, and if enough citizens say “No” and refuse to acknowledge or comply, there ain’t smack “government” can do. The gov may want a monopoly on force, power and violence, but it doesn’t have one!
…not until and unless they can totally disarm their population, the way China has.
“Olbermann attended Cornell University where he obtained a BS in communication”…
He obtained a BS, then made a career of dispensing it.
Keith Olbermann Revealed as Functional Illiterate not to mention a Communist.
Since Olbermann and his opinions including those on sports are no longer considered of value. He has in an attempt to become relevant again stepped into the political realm of commentary. If not for Mainly 2A sites like this one what he says in the above article has been mostly ignored by the MSM. Only the Washington Times mentions on their site. No one is interested or cares what he has to say. Even Liberal Gun Grabbers find him Non compos mentis.
He is a typical product of a typical American University. Marginal language skills, nonexistent critical thinking skills, heaps of critical theory based ideology. No surprise here.
Excellent post!
Never never EVER let facts get in the way, says the Marxist expert….
Anyone who even bothers to read or listen too this guy is wasting time and effort. He try’s SO hard to be relevant- but he’s not … FLUSH.
Don’t waste time arguing with him; don’t waste time pretending that he believes what he’s saying. He doesn’t. He wants you disarmed, and his tools to accomplish that are lies and low-information voters. That’s all there is to it.
“…The Founders understood the importance of law-abiding citizens’ right to legally own firearms for things like hunting, sport and personal protection and the 2nd Amendment is one of our most important and cherished civil rights in the U.S. Constitution.” No, I actually disagree with the statement as written above. The Founders understood the importance of law-abiding citizens’ right to legally own firearms for… defending the country against tyranny. Things like hunting, sport and personal protection are just added benefits gained due to the second amendment. The 2nd Amendment is one of our most important because without it, we probably wouldn’t… Read more »
We are already losing the rest of them….The Bill of Rights is pretty much ignored by most of the Judicial Branch.
Anyone that is a true patriotic, red-blooded American will support and defend the Constitution. These marxist/communist people on the left want to twist and contort anything that they disagree with or stands in the way of marxist ideology. It is unfortunate that we have allowed the schools and media to be infiltrated by these un-Americans.
BTW, have you noticed that all of the complete morons are on the left. Be careful as you might tip over Guam.
Keith Olberman is one of the the most vocal leftists on the planet and with his bully pulpit he is allowed to spew his filth in many platforms. It’s the dolts who listen to his that are the stupid ones !
The 2nd Amendment was put in such a place of prominence as the enforcer of the Constitution. God gave us the Right, guns are our tools and the militia is “ the whole of the population “ . Even Overman is a militia man, whether he knows it or not, but there’s a lot he doesn’t know and it shows..
Keith Olbermann, I think that says it all.
come on guys, it’s keith. he graduated from cornell with a bunch of b.s. in communications.
A regular Major in BS
That says it all.
More like Wayne LaPierre is Functional Illiterate.
I disagree, LaPierre is a cold, calculating, manipulative, dishonest, immoral criminal genius. How else can you explain his years of manipulating and controlling every aspect of the NRA and stealing from it’s treasury to live like a king at members expense without accomplishing anything positive in defense of the 2nd Amendment other than lip service?
I believe it was phrased as it is in order to be broader than merely “owning”; it also includes the ability to make, buy, sell, trade and loan arms.
Why is the Left trying so hard to teach our children CRT; don’t they realized THEY already have enough MORONS!
Keith is a typical liberal idiot that thinks the spin cycle will justify all his lies he is trying to brainwash people with . He needs to go back to the drawing board because most people do not buy his line of drivel ! Infact 73 % believe he is full of shit !
Not liberal. Progressive New Left. Or, a Marxist who lacks both the ability and the stones to shoot. Big difference.