Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Will they come out with a text book that says the penalties called for in the Obamacare act, are not penalties but taxes? Even after the people pushing Obamacare for years before it was passed, swore up and down it contained no new taxes?
Naw, nobody would ever have the brazen effronery to tell a lie like that.
You are ignoring that you posted the incorrect 2nd amendment and are making a big deal of nothing.
Considering this study guide was written in 1998, it was absolutely correct. The 2nd Amendment had always been interpreted by the courts as a collective right until 2008, when for the first time in US history, the Supreme Court in the Heller decision interpreted it to be an individual right.
Of course, what the 2nd amendment really means is:
"Since an armed and capable populace is necessary for security and freedom, the right of ordinary people to own and carry guns and other such weapons cannot be taken away or restricted."
These people could have rephrased it that way, and actually gotten it right.
Why didn't they?
The textbook in question seems to be titled, "U.S. History: Preparing for the Advanced Placement Exam".
How do you suppose people woud react if the Advanced Placement Exam contained the question:
Q: Does the 2nd amendment protect the right to keep and bear arms, only for people actively involved in their state militia?
(a) Yes
(b) No
The answer, of course, is (b) No. The 2nd amendment protects EVERYBODY'S right, regardless of their affiliation with a militia or any other military group.
But people who used this book to study for the exam, would get it wrong every time. Just as some of the liberal fanatics in this thread, are doing now.
Do you suppose the liberals would be as benign and accepting of a Math textbook that told its students that 2+2=7? That would be just as wrong.
Of course, what the 2nd amendment really means is:
"Since an armed and capable populace is necessary for security and freedom, the right of ordinary people to own and carry guns and other such weapons cannot be taken away or restricted."
These people could have rephrased it that way, and actually gotten it right.
Why didn't they?
Several reasons:
1.) At the time of writing (and you can see it in early documented versions of this ammendment) the state militia and right to carry arms were two different concepts, not connected. It went through various rewrites for purposes of states rights, etc, that even then were subject to large debate. It was almost two seperate ammendments. It still was, using the writing style at the time, seperating it out with a comma (think of the comma then as a new paragraph stop today)- the comma purposely inserted and meant two deliminate the two. By the way you misquote it yourself. There is no "since" in the ammendment. The actual ammendment as ratified is such: "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." So you have a.) A citizen has the right to form a militia, b.) a citizen has the right to bear arms. Two concepts, only loosly connected. The reason they are combined together into one ammendment was for convenience in ratification.
Early version of this ammendment actually had other provisions tacked on as well - i.e. the right for citizens not to be forced to room and board soldiers.
2.) If you want to tie the two concepts together - a "militia" in that time is, simply, an armed citizen. It was not an organized body as you perceive the armed forces or even national guard to be. The concept is more about states rights.
3.) And finally, the supreme court has clearly and repeatedly agreed with the above interpretation by the founding fathers - the 2nd ammendment clause on gun rights have nothing to do with a formal militia.
Whatever your stand on gun control - the textbook is not only misguided, but blatantly incorrect.
A History textbook in use at many high schools in Texas, deliberately misquotes the 2nd amendment to the U.S. Constitution, to try to give the impression that people only have the right to keep and bear arms when they are acting in a militia.
It's just another instance of anti-gun people trying to illegally restrict gun ownership.
It is increasingly clear (if it wasn't before) that eternal vigilance is the price of liberty. We must ALWAYS be on the lookout for things like this.
seems like the only misquote is the recent supreme court numbnuts, not the text book. As soon as the US got its own amred services, we should of retired the 2nd amendment as outdated. Now we have crazy numbnuts . . .acting as if guns are necessary in case you don't like whatever president was elected. crazy $#it.
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.
The second amendment was hotly debated when Madison was writing the first 10 amendments.
Only in terms of states rights, not gun rights. The ability for citizens to own arms for self defense or for protection against a tyrannical government was never debated. The second ammendment has it's roots in the English Bill or Rights
A History textbook in use at many high schools in Texas, deliberately misquotes the 2nd amendment to the U.S. Constitution, to try to give the impression that people only have the right to keep and bear arms when they are acting in a militia.
It's just another instance of anti-gun people trying to illegally restrict gun ownership.
It is increasingly clear (if it wasn't before) that eternal vigilance is the price of liberty. We must ALWAYS be on the lookout for things like this.
It doesn't look to me like they were quoting the Bill of Rights at all. It looks to me like they were paraphrasing the Bill of Rights.
I find it hard to believe that the Texas Board of Education was promoting restrictions on gun ownership.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
