A Further Discussion on the Second Amendment

With all the rhetoric around gun control, especially with the numerous shootings that have happened recently, I thought that I should expand on my discussion of the Second Amendment. When the Amendments were ratified, the Founders made sure that the most important was placed first. The first ten amendments are called The Bill of Rights for a reason. These are rights, not privileges, that are given by a greater power than a government and guaranteed in writing by the government.

The Bill of Rights are not listed as rights given to the people by the government but are actually restraints on the government. Our Founders were intelligent enough to know that men are inherently greedy, self-centered, egotistical, power-hungry scoundrels. They made sure that the government, not the people, were restricted. It was their intention to keep government small.

What does this have to do with our right to ‘keep and bear arms?’ Everything.

David W. Brown, in his article in The Week (How Alexander Hamilton solved America’s Gun Problem – 228 Years Ago, theweek.com) asserted that the ‘Militiamen’ of Oregon, Ohio, Idaho, etc., are not actually militiamen but insurrectionists. Why? Because the militia is ‘comprised of sane men and women who own guns and wish to comply with state law.’

The Second Amendment states, in entirety, “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.”

Hamilton wrote in Federalist 29: If circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude, that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little, if at all, inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of the fellow citizens.

So, let’s go back to those militiamen that confronted federal agents in Oregon, Idaho, Ohio, etc. What was the government doing? What did those federal agents do that forced the militiamen to confront them? They were infringing on the rights of those citizens. They were attempting to confiscate private property for the government. So, were those militiamen insurrectionists? Not in my opinion. They were standing up to a government that had overstepped its’ bounds. Those militiamen were protecting their rights as free citizens.

The Declaration of Independence states it perfectly: That secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, - That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness… But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

What has our ‘duly elected’ officials in Washington, DC been doing? What are they doing now? They are slowly but surely whittling away our liberties, our rights, our freedoms by regulation, unconstitutional laws, etc., all in the name of safety. Ben Franklin said it so eloquently, (paraphrased) If a person gives up a few liberties for a small amount of safety, that person deserves neither Liberty nor Safety.

Our Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms has no restrictions on the people. It restricts the GOVERNMENT. The government cannot inhibit the citizens of this great nation from owning or possessing firearms; regardless of make, model, caliber, magazine capacity, whether it is used for personal protection or hunting, or any other restriction. The Second Amendment states it clearly and the Supreme Court has upheld that right.

It doesn’t matter how many laws are passed or how intensive a background check is made; it doesn’t matter if capacity is restricted or if a certain model of weapon is banned; if a criminal wants a weapon he/she/it will get a weapon. Criminals don’t care about laws or restrictions. I’m sure that the shooter in Philadelphia last night went to a gun shop on Main Street and told the owner that he wanted an AR-15 to kill protect himself against the police and to kill police officers if they came to arrest him. Yep! That’s what he did.

The shooter in El Paso, the same thing. Or in Dayton. They went to the store and told the owners that they wanted to go kill people because of their racism, political beliefs, jobs, etc. And the guy that tried to blow up the ICE office in Tacoma. Same thing. These people didn’t care about any law. They didn’t get their weapons through legal channels. If they did they sure didn’t let on that they were going to use those weapons in mass destruction of human life.

Laws are only for law-abiding citizens. Criminals don’t follow laws. If they did, we wouldn’t need police officers, sheriffs or deputies, FBI, ATF, etc. These politicians are saying we need to ban guns, have buy-backs, confiscate weapons, red-flag people (and that is a totally different discussion), etc. All these people are doing is trying to disarm the people so they can take complete control. If Americans are disarmed they can be overtaken by anyone just like North Korea, China, Venezuela, etc. The Democrats keep saying we need to be like Denmark, Sweden, Norway, or some other European Socialist country. Sure we do. The only country in Europe that has little to no gun violence is Sweden.

According to Vox.com, Sweden ranks 10^th out of 178 countries in the world for per capita gun ownership but in 2014 had only 21 homicides by firearms. Maybe if our Democrat friends in Congress would reverse their stand on guns the problem of mass shootings, violent attacks on people, armed robberies, etc., would lessen considerably. After all, the lion will attack anything that doesn’t fight back. If a violent attacker doesn’t know if his victim is armed or not, whether they are able to kill them instead of the opposite, they will think twice about attacking that person. Most, not all, of the mass shootings, violent attacks, homicides, etc. that have been reported in recent years have all been in gun-free zones. Schools, malls, concerts, sanctuary cities, anti-gun cities and states. Shouldn’t that tell these politicians something?

Our Second Amendment right is under attack and has been for some time. Politicians say that we don’t need to protect ourselves, we have law enforcement for that. Sure, when seconds count the law is only minutes away. How has that helped the thousands that are shot and/or killed in Chicago or Baltimore? I’d rather have a gun and never need it than need it and not be allowed to have it.

The Founders knew what they were doing. They had just fought a long, hard war against a much better armed and trained military. The English King was a tyrannical ruler. The colonists were treated badly, had few rights and privileges, were taxed into poverty without having anything in return, were arrested and tried unfairly, etc. They knew that it would take an armed citizenry to protect the country against such tyranny again. They set up our experimental government to protect us against such tyranny. It was then and is now the people’s responsibility to keep those freedoms that were won through such hardship. Tens of thousands killed and maimed to win our freedom from that tyranny. Did they die in vain?

The first president of our nation that went against the Constitution openly was Abraham Lincoln. Everyone thinks the Civil War was fought over slavery. It was not. It was fought over State’s Rights. The southern states took up arms against the north because they felt that the government was unfair and overstepping its’ bounds. Lincoln would not let them secede as was their right. Did he do the right thing? I think so but that doesn’t mean that he was right in doing it. He freed the slaves. He kept the country one union. The United States is better for it. But he set a precedent. Today, the government oversteps its bounds all the time. Our Representatives represent themselves, their own power and wealth not the people that elected them. We are taxed almost to poverty without our consent for reasons that the government wants.

This is why there is a Second Amendment. We have the right, the duty, to stand up to a government that has usurped its’ power. In today’s world, we shouldn’t have to take up arms against our own governing body. We should be able to vote them out. Just listen to the candidates and what they are campaigning on for the 2020 election. It sure isn’t their socialist/communist policies. It is all about destroying the duly elected President. Propaganda is how people get elected. Criminal spying and frivolous lawsuits against opponents is how elections are won. It is no longer voting for the better man; it is voting for the lesser of two evils.

If it comes down to it, I do believe the American patriots will take up arms against the tyrannical dominion of the socialist/communist soft coup that is going on. If the government demands we give up our arms and starts arresting and incarcerating people for owning weapons then those patriots will fight back in more and more violent ways. Antifa had better watch out. Black Lives Matter had better watch their step. Sharia Law advocates had better keep their religion to themselves. Anti-Semites might want to leave the Jews alone. Illegal aliens might want to rethink crossing the border other than through a legal entryway. This is not being racist, it is being honest.

The Second Amendment is there for the people to protect their property, their families, their communities, their freedoms, and their rights. True American patriots will only take so much before they start to fight back. That is what that amendment is for.

The usurpations of the radical left and the weak right that inhabit the hallowed halls of Congress is getting to a point of no return. The American people and the several states have given up rights after rights to the federal government because of complacency and trust. People like my 94-year-old mother who believes with all her heart that our government wouldn’t do anything against the people that elected them were the last ones that had a half-way decent government. It is my generation, the baby-boomers that really started giving away our rights. We allowed the government to do more and more for us while taking more and more from us. It is the Millennials that are saying, “I demand the government gives me everything.” And it is Generation Y that will do it.

The Bill of Rights will be revoked. Freedom of Speech will go away and be replaced with government thought police (political correctness is the start of it and everything being hate speech is keeping it going), freedom of the press is only the progressive press, if more than a couple of people are assembled it is disbanded because of a public threat. Only the government needs to have weapons, eminent domain supersedes private ownership, the presumption of innocence has been replaced with guilty until proven not guilty. You see the pattern?

The Second Amendment is our one way to protect ourselves against these usurpations. It is the ONLY way to keep the other rights we have enjoyed for over 240 years. It is the one right that makes us safe from all enemies, both foreign and domestic. In my opinion, the Second is the most important of our rights, of the restrictions of government.

And that is why the government is so hard-pressed to do away with it. That is why the government will restrict ownership, regulate capacity, caliber, and model. That is why the socialist/communist candidates are all calling for bans on ownership. That is why we must make sure that our Second Amendment right is never taken away.