The recent shootings in Littleton, Colorado have brought the discussion of guns in our society to the forefront. Of course the political left is calling for more gun control from stricter laws on who can own a gun to the outright ban of all firearms. The political right is calling for stricter enforcement of current laws. The one component left out of most discussions is the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution.
"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."
There are four key components to this amendment. Militia, the people, keep and bear and not be infringed.
Those anxious to bypass the amendment and confiscate private weapons point to the opening phrase as evidence this no longer is applicable. They say that a well regulated Militia is the national guard. This is really a right afforded to the states, not individuals. The Militia IS individuals.
In the 18th Century, there were very few large standing armies. When a country went to war, it's citizens joined up, when the war was over, they went home. Kind of like a voluntary draft. When our Revolution started, ordinary citizens took their guns down off the rack above the door and went to war to secure their freedom from a tyrannical king 3000 miles away. This was the militia, John Q. Public and his gun. In order for this to have been possible every citizen must have had his own weapon. The founders recognized this and ensured that if our government ever became tyrannical itself, the people would have a method to overthrow that government through armed rebellion and start again. I read in a recent article by Walter Williams, the chair of the economics department at George Mason University, what some of the Framers wrote about liberty, guns, and tyranny.
· George Washington: "Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence."
· Thomas Jefferson: "And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. ... The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
· Richard Henry Lee: "To preserve liberty it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them."
· Alexander Hamilton (Federalist No. 28): "If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is no recourse left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all forms of positive government." And in Federalist No. 46, Hamilton said, "The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed."
· James Madison (Federalist, No. 46): Predicted that encroachments by the federal government would provoke "plans of resistance" and an "appeal to a trial of force."
· Tench Coxe: "Whereas civil rulers, not having their duty to the people duly before them, may attempt to tyrannize ... the people are confirmed by the article in their right to keep and bear their private arms."
The Constitution does not give the individual only the right to possess weapons, but to also wield them in a manner they see fit. " to keep and BEAR arms " This would include sport shooting, hunting, personal protection, and the overthrow of a tyrannical government.
Clearly the rights enumerated in this amendment apply to individuals. It says plainly " the right of the people "
The last and most important phrase in the 2nd Amendment says " shall not be infringed". It is clear that a government could make weapons so difficult to obtain without an outright ban that the amendment would essentially be useless. Even though individuals could technically own guns they would be ineffective in using them, giving the public no recourse against tyranny.
Lets assume for a moment that outlawing guns would stop the violence (scientific studies on the issue suggest outlawing personal possession of firearms would increase violent crime). Before we can pass a single law outlawing guns, or making them harder to get, we would first have to repeal the 2nd Amendment. The lack of discussion on repealing this amendment shows two things, 1) the gun-confiscators are hiding their true agenda, and 2) they have nothing but utter contempt for the Constitution.
I am not here to advocate the overthrow of our government. The framers recognized that revolution is a thing to be avoided so they wrote in to the Constitution a means for bloodless revolution. Revolution by election if you will. We can change everything about our form of government we want to through Constitutional Amendments. We can even abolish the whole thing and start over. We could rewrite the Constitution forming a communist or socialist government if we wanted. We could choose someone as King and make a monarchy. The point is we can do whatever we want as long as we play by the rules spelled out in the Constitution.
What are we as a people to do when the government no longer plays by the rules? That is when law-abiding patriots feel the urge to remove themselves from the arena. The much-maligned separatists are citizens who want to simply be left alone from the ever-increasing reach of the federal government. This is seen as dangerous by the socialist-elite so they seek to forcibly return them to a society they want no part of. As a result people die defending their homes and property by exercising their Constitutional right to "keep and bear arms", and to be "
secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects
".
Sponsored Links |