J. Michael Malec in his letter ("Founders never implied treason," Feb. 28) should consider what the Founders said of the Second Amendment. Mr. Malec erroneously claims the term well-regulated means government regulation.
However, "well-regulated" in context of the "militia" doesn't imply government regulation. It means the necessary militia be well-regulated, but not by the national government. The overriding purpose of the Second Amendment is guaranteeing the right of the people to keep and bear arms as a check on the standing army, which the Constitution gave the Congress the power to "raise and support."
Noah Webster, in urging ratification of the Constitution, said, "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe." George Mason, in remarks to Virginia delegates recalled experience with the British monarch's decrees "to disarm the people. was the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
Thus, the well-regulated militia necessary to the security of a free state might someday fight against an army of a tyrannical national government. It is ludicrous to suppose the Bill of Rights, including the Second Amendment, which are proscriptions on federal powers, simultaneously acted as a grant of power to the same. Similarly, the term "well-regulated" would make no sense if it were a grant of "regulation" power to the government (national or state), when the purpose was to both declare individual rights and define where the federal government's powers ended.
ANDREW GELBMAN
Albany
