Submitted by Leif Rakur, Sep 24, 2007 13:27

A prominent writer who called himself "Federal Farmer" critiqued the Constitution as it came from the Constitutional Convention. On Jan. 25, 1788, he wrote that "the constitution ought to secure a genuine and guard against a select militia, by providing that the militia shall always be kept well organized, armed, and disciplined, and include, according to the past and general usage of the states, all men capable of bearing arms…" In the author's exclusively military context, what did he mean by "all men capable of bearing arms"? Was he simply referring to all men who could carry or wear a gun? Or did he mean, in the standard military sense, "all men capable of militia service"? Think some more about the meaning of the following: "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."

Note: Comments are screened, and in some cases edited, before posting. We reserve the right to reject anything we find objectionable.