The Real Second Amendment

Here's another dose of specious reasoning from Senator Sam Brownback's presidential campaign site (from the 'issues' section):

Gun Rights/Second Amendment
At the heart of the Bill of Rights is the Second Amendment. This Amendment guarantees an individual the right to keep and bear arms, which is essential, as the Amendment itself affirms, to “the security of a free state.”

So there you have it. According to Senator Brownback, the Second Amendment says that the right to keep and bear arms is essential to the security of a free state.

Now let's look at what the amendment actually says:

AMENDMENT II.
A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Res ipsa loquitor, you illiterate hick. The Second Amendment makes it clear that the right to keep and bear arms is CONTINGENT upon the existence and necessity of a militia. It is the militia - NOT the guns themselves - that are affirmed as being "essential". That's because, at the time the constitution was written, the United States did not have a standing army. The American army was raised on an ad hoc basis - which means that once we found ourselves in armed conflict, we decided to start rounding up some people to fight. Militias could add to the "security of a free State" by acting as first responders until a proper army was raised (like the Minutemen in the Revolutionary War).

Today - over two centuries later - America has the most well-funded and expertly trained standing army in the world. Our soldiers are no longer civilians who keep a gun in the closet and attend a monthly militia drill out on the town square. Today's army is comprised of trained professionals who make a career out of defending the country, and they're quite good at it. We don't need a militia anymore, and therefore we don't need guns.

But even if it were the guns, and not the militia, that the Second Amendment affirms as vital to national security, my point would still be valid. Senator Brownback, how exactly is it that arming ordinary citizens makes anyone any safer? Personally, I think protecting the right of any jerk with $400 to buy a lethal firearm undermines the security of a modern free State.

The Second Amendment to the Constitution must be revised or rejected, because in its current state it is obsolete.

PS: Where does Brownback get off saying that the Second Amendment is "at the heart of the Bill of Rights"?? What about the First or Fifth Amendments? I think most non-homicidal Americans would choose free speech, freedom of religion, or due process of law over gun rights any day. I'd say the First Amendment is the heart of the Bill of Rights; the Second Amendment is more like the ass.