I’ve often speculated about the order in which the Bill of Rights was arranged.  Why is the Right to Keep and Bear Arms in the Second Amendment, but all by itself?  Why are the Freedoms of Speech, Religion, the Press, Peaceable Assembly, and to Seek Redress of Grievances in the First Amendment, yet all bundled together?

Clearly, these were both considered very important by the framers of our Constitution.  After all, they were specifically amended to it as the primary “fix” to the document.  Most of our rights never even get specifically named (see Amendments 9 & 10).  Why then would our founding fathers put so much emphasis on these two amendments?

Experience.  Many of the men who created our nation were self-made.  They understood the importance of knowledge to human achievement.  Knowledge allowed men like Benjamin Franklin to go from lowly candlemaker’s son to wealthy diplomat and accomplished scientist.

It was also critical to the survival of a republic.  As students of history, most of our founders understood the role that ignorance, hopelessness, and avarice played in the decline of the Roman Republic and its ultimate collapse into imperial ruin.  Statesmen like Thomas Jefferson championed public education as the key to enriching the minds of American children, so that those children would be ready to rise to the task of building and sustaining a new kind of “empire”, one of liberty rather than tyranny.

Is it any wonder then that the framers of our Constitution enshrined in the top spot those human rights most critical to independent thought and reason?  Let’s look at it a bit closer:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

 

• …Respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof- This means that the federal government is forbidden to involve itself in religious affairs.  It cannot dictate spiritual beliefs, nor the teachings of organizations that hold those beliefs.  Considering that in 1789, most people got their educations through churches, this was not simply about protecting our relationships with God, it was an early exercise in academic freedom.
• …Or abridging the freedom of speech- At its most basic, what is teaching?  When we want to share our knowledge with someone, the most natural and human way to do so is through our power of speech.  The founders understood the possibility for speech to be abused and to spread untruth and ignorance.  They also knew that if this most fundamental of human rights was lost, all of the other methods of sharing information were compromised.
• …Or of the press-  Similarly, the founders were broadly familiar with the rising power of new media, like newspapers, to impart knowledge and sway public opinion.  If governments were able to control new technologies, they could severely restrict the interplay of ideas necessary to the success of a free state.
• …Or the right of the people peaceably to assemble-  People assemble “peaceably” for all sorts of reasons- to build things, to go to church, to attend school, to help each other…  All of these were considered necessary to the functioning of the free republic envisioned by the founders.  After all, how can a People be their own government if they cannot come together to discuss, to decide, and to work together.
• …And to petition the Government for a redress of grievances-  I think that this is the clue that tells us why the framers of our Constitution put the First Amendment in that critical first spot.  All of the human rights enshrined herein are those necessary to run our government as informed, educated, and responsible citizens- so long as our republic is secure and functioning as designed.

Why then a Second Amendment?  If the First Amendment protects the rights necessary to keep our government on track, why include such a contentious article as this:

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.

Experience, again.

The founders of our nation had just lived through what happens when a government ceases to respect the fundamental human rights of its citizens.  The framers of our Constitution had watched the King of England ignore his citizens’ (sorry, “subjects'”) legal rights to petition for a redress of grievances.  They had experienced, first-hand, the collapse of a proud and well-established tradition of individual rights- a tradition that at the time been one of the finest in Europe.

The founders of our nation placed the Second Amendment where they did because it was “Plan B”.  So long as we are all pulling our weight, being educated, informed citizens who actively contribute to the maintenance of our society, there should be no need for a “well regulated militia”.

Unfortunately, as General George Washington and his commanders found out the hard way- by the time you need soldiers, it’s too late to train them.  Most of the Revolutionary War was a series of unmitigated disasters on the battlefield.  Morale, hygiene, supplies, and discipline were all in short supply.

The framers of our Constitution wanted to avoid repeating history by ensuring that we and our fellow citizens possessed at least a baseline understanding of firearms and personal discipline.  They also wanted us to be well-educated enough to learn new skills quickly.

The First and Second Amendments are, as they were intended, inseparable.  Remove one and the other collapses.  History has already provided clear object lessons on this topic.  It is for us, the living, to live both as honorable citizens committed to peaceably maintaining and building this priceless republic that we have been given.