"A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercise, I advise the gun. While this gives a moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise, and independence to the mind. [...] Let your gun therefore be the constant companion of your walks." - Thomas Jefferson to Peter Carr, August 19, 1785.
Upon hearing any Socialist opine over The Second Amendment, it becomes immediately obvious that the same three intellectual deficiencies which plague their views on virtually all other issues, pervert their understanding of The Second Amendment as well.
1. An alarming lack of reading comprehension.
2. An egregious ignorance of history.
3. An inability to ascribe to terms their correct meaning.
What The Second Amendment says:
"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."
If this right is conferred only to militias, why does it specify "people" in the third clause? Because the "right" to keep and bear arms is being consigned to the people, as opposed to being designated an appurtenance exclusive to militia membership or the state. The term "people" here, is absolutely no different in meaning, than when used in the First, or Fourth Amendment.
"The right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated."Is the term "people" a reference to government agencies, entities, or proxies in these instances? No, it's not, and neither is it such in the Second Amendment.
Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story, appointed by James Madison, literally wrote the book on the meaning of the U.S. Constitution, and utterly obliterates the notion that the militia and the military are the same entity in his incontrovertibly authoritative treatise on that document.
"One of the ordinary modes, by which tyrants accomplish their purposes without resistance, is, by disarming the people, and making it an offence to keep arms, and by substituting a regular army in the stead of a resort to the militia. The friends of a free government can not be too watchful, to overcome the dangerous tendency of the public mind to sacrifice, for the sake of mere private convenience, this powerful check upon the designs of ambitious men. The importance of this article will scarcely be doubted by any persons, who have duly reflected upon the subject. The militia is the natural defense of a free country against sudden foreign invasions, domestic insurrections, and domestic usurpations of power by rulers. It is against sound policy for a free people to keep up large military establishments and standing armies in time of peace, both from the enormous expenses, with which they are attended, and the facile means, which they afford to ambitious and unprincipled rulers, to subvert the government, or trample upon the rights of the people. The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpations and arbitrary power of rulers; and it will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them." - Joseph Story, A Familiar Exposition of the Constitution of the United States, Amendments to the Constitution, 1840.Founder Noah Webster likewise makes a clear distinction between an armed civilian populace and the military, and unequivocally asserts the former must exist to suppress tyranny in the latter.
Another source of power in government is a military force. But this, to be efficient, must be superior to any force that exists among the people, or which they can command: for otherwise this force would be annihilated, on the first exercise of acts of oppression. Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword ; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States. - Noah Webster, An Examination Into the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution Proposed by the Late Convention Held at Philadelphia: With Answers to the Principal Objections that Have Been Raised Against the System, 1787.What is a "militia?"
"Who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers." - George Mason, The debates in the several state conventions on the adoption of the federal Constitution, as recommended by the general convention at Philadelphia, in 1787.
A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves, and render regular troops in a great measure unnecessary. [...] 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. - Letters from The Federal Farmer to The Republican, #18, January 25, 1788.A militia is comprised of regular citizens, as opposed to professional, full-time soldiers which comprise a "standing army." Perhaps of even greater pertinence is that, during the Founding Era, militia members (being ordinary citizens) typically used their personal firearms while serving in said capacity. Therefore it was imperative that "the people," id est, private citizens, be allowed to "keep and bear arms." This requirement for able bodied men to serve in militias, and to provide their own weapons for said service, had been practiced for centuries prior in England, was practiced in the American Colonies, and persisted for the bulk of American history under the Uniform Militia Act (1792), which states:
"Each and every free able-bodied white male citizen of the respective states, resident therein, who is or shall be of the age of eighteen years, and under the age of forty-five years [...] shall severally and respectively be enrolled in the militia [....] That every citizen so enrolled and noticed, shall, within six months thereafter, provide himself with a good musket or firelock, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints, and a knapsack, a pouch, with a box therein, to contain not less than twenty four cartridges, suited to the bore of his musket or firelock, each cartridge to contain a proper quantity of powder and ball."
"A well regulated Militia, composed of the gentlemen, freeholders, and other freeman, is the natural strength, and only safe and stable security of a free Government, and that such Militia will [...] render it unnecessary to keep any Standing Army (ever dangerous to liberty) in this Colony, we the subscribers, inhabitants of Fairfax County, have freely and voluntarily agreed, and hereby do agree and solemnly promise, to enroll and embody ourselves into a Militia for this County, intended to consist of all the able-bodied freemen from eighteen to fifty years of age, under Officers of their own choice, [...] from among our friends and acquaintance, upon whose justice, humanity and bravery, we can rely. [...] And such of us as have, or can procure Rifle-Guns, and understand the use of them, will be ready to form a Company of Marksmen or Light-Infantry for the said Regiment, choosing our own Officers as aforesaid. [...] And we do each of us for ourselves respectively, promise and engage to keep a good Firelock, in proper order, and to furnish ourselves as soon as possible with, and always keep by us, one pound of Gunpowder, four pounds of Lead, one dozen Gun-Flints, and a pair of Bullet-Moulds, with a Cartouch-Box, or Powder-Horn, and Bag for Balls. [...] And that we will always hold ourselves in readiness, in case of necessity, hostile invasion, or real danger, to defend and preserve to the utmost of our power, our religion, the laws of our country, and the just rights and privileges of our fellow-subjects, our posterity, and ourselves, upon the principles of the English Constitution." - Extracts from the Proceedings of the Committee of Fairfax County (Virginia), on the 17th of January, 1775.
If the Second Amendment banned private gun ownership, then the militias of the day would have been without arms (clearly not the case), and would have consequently served no purpose. And far from being merely for "hunting" or "self-defense" from common criminals, the purpose of the Second Amendment is plainly conveyed by Hamilton in Federalist 28 and 29, as being for the purpose of opposing tyrannical government officials and/or "military establishments."
"If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no resource left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government."
"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 their fellow-citizens. This appears to me [...] the best possible security against it."And thus concludes this contribution.
No comments:
Post a Comment