|
so presumably there's no legal basis for disarming gangs in a city, based on this reading of the second amendment--i mean, what's the difference between a militia and a gang, really, except that presumably one approves at some level of a militia and does not approve of a gang?
so let's see: the constitution was ratified in 1791.
this is 2008.
what's changed in the interim?
well, one thing that's changed is the development of a modern state. and one of the things that defines the modern state is its "monopoly on legitimate violence"....
maybe the second amendment is among the more entirely time-bound elements of the constitution, speaking *entirely* to 1791 and not at all to conditions that obtain now.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear
it make you sick.
-kamau brathwaite
|