LETTER: The Second Amendment always inspires debate
To support an argument for an unlimited right to arms Perter Scalisi (Dec. 30 letter) cites James Madison out of context. Madison writes in Federalist Paper 46 that an armed militia is necessary to stand up against a standing army. Similar is also seen in the 1776 Virginia Declaration of Rights, the Pennsylvania Constitution of 1776 and the Second Amendment. Self-defense appears only in the Pennsylvania Constitution, and in both Federalist Paper 46 and the Second Amendment Madison writes about arms only as they relate to a militia, not an individual.
Having been educated in British law, Madison undoubtedly saw individual rights to arms to have been clearly defined by the 1689 British Bill of Rights: “Christians may have arms for their defence suitable to their conditions and as allowed by law.”
I also take issue with Mr. Scalisi’s argument of an unlimited natural right to arms. My understanding of rights traces to John Locke. Locke wrote that a civilized society has the obligation to create laws to protect certain natural rights, and these legal rights take precedence over natural rights. Jefferson paraphrased Locke’s natural rights as “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” in the Declaration of Independence. Accepting that we live in a civilized society and Jefferson is a Founder, our government is obligated whenever needed to write laws that further protect the right to life by reducing accidental deaths and that will take precedence over an unlimited natural right to a weapon.