 |
 |
 |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|
 |
"If someone is so fearful, that they're going to start using their weapons to protect their rights, it makes me very nervous that these people have these weapons at all." — U.S. Rep. Henry Waxman |
|||
Firearms PossessionThe Second Amendment was written to declare that owning and carrying arms (weapons including, but not limited to firearms), was a God given or natural right (that is a power given above the government, not derived from the government), so that people could defend themselves, and that Congress had no power to trespass upon that right. And that it was important for the citizen to be proficient in their weapons to aid in their militia. What can we conclude?
Let us be clear. The Second Amendment is not about duck hunting as Bush the Elder would have you believe. It was written by men who had a deep distrust of government based upon personal experience. Indeed, without the first ten Amendments they had no intention of ratifying the Constitution. This Amendment was not just to ensure the ability to defend against invading forces. This Amendment was specifically included to ensure that people residing in this country would be able to overthrow their government should it become tyrannical. And the types of weapons that should be available are the types of weapons that are militarily useful. Yes I am leading there ... but first, let me start a different tract. Per the Constitution, ALL power held by the government, is derived from the people. That is not some mystical power where when a sufficient accumulation of people have gathered they can confer powers onto government that are unique to government. No. Any power government has, is derived directly from the people. Therefore any power government claims must first be claimable by both "the people" and any individual, of whom "the people" are derived. Why does the government possess some special wisdom, that the individual does not? Trust me, having worked for government for many years, government has no wisdom whatsoever. Government is concerned solely with its own propagation ... everything is a political problem. First and foremost, all solutions are political solutions amicable to the government. There are many caring individuals working for the government, but those who work their way towards the top, are concerned solely with perpetuating their own turf for advancement. Ultimately this means that the government has no power to restrict people from owning M-16's or the newest military rifle, the XM8. Or any other military weapon. But the government does. How? Easy, they threaten you with arms. "But, but, but, that is ridiculous," you say. "That means anyone who wanted one could own an F-16 or a nuclear bomb!" If the government has the power to possess such things then clearly so do the people. If you can afford it. I know, at this point you are going, "Wow! This guy is a nut." Fair enough. All I ask is that you think about what I have said. Sleep on it.
There is nothing special about the government that makes it wiser to possess, handle and use such weapons, than you are. Indeed, since the government is a faceless, nonentity, it is more likely to misuse such weapons (and routinely does) than individuals who would be held directly responsible for their use. As Ruby Ridge and Waco attests, government is not held responsible for its misdeeds, it is rewarded. If you fail to support the collector who loves machine guns, why should he stand with you when the government comes for your deer rifle? If the government has the power to take a "type" of gun, they have the power to take all types of guns. If the government has the power to restrict the carry of a "type" of gun, they have the power to restrict the carry of all types of guns. Based upon the history of types of people who are most likely to misuse guns, the only people who should not be allowed to possess arms work for the government.
Do I support the NRA (National Rifle Association)? Hell NO! They are directly responsible for writing most of the heinous anti-gun legislation we are now fighting. Worse, they use this fight to raise money from their loyal membership who actually believe the NRA is defending their rights to possess arms. There are only two lobbying pro-arms groups that I know of in the USA. They are Gun Owners of America and Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership (membership open to anyone who believes in the right to keep and bear arms). Everyone else is more than happy to take your money, and help compromise towards your eventual disarmament.
If you are interested in reducing crime, and protecting yourself from being a victim, you can dial 911 and wait on the line, or procure a concealed weapons permit, and waive it at the next bad guy you meet. Or you can pack a gun, and waive it at the next thug who accosts you whether of the government or non-government variety. Which situation is likeliest to reduce crime? Remember, legislators lack the power to control your right to bear arms. They cannot extend you a privilege in law, that you own by right. That right is not theirs to give or take. It is yours to waive, forfeit or keep by whatever means you choose. Just remember the government, you know the ones who work for you protecting your rights, will lock you up and throw away the key for carrying a firearm concealed without their permission.
Addendum: The Constitution spells out the formation of the federal government, and the duties of that government, and the limitations of powers of that government. These duties are explicitly stated, as are the limitations of the federal government's powers. Contrary to what the black robes state, there is no implied or inherent government powers in the Constitution, the Tenth Amendment makes this perfectly clear. Only tyrannies perpetrated by judges dishonoring themselves and their oath to defend you and the Constitution, whenever the black robes find some new government power or duty in the Constitution, that is not there. The Constitution does nothing else. If you do not like that, you have one of two options: 1) tough! 2) Amend it. The Bill of Rights (the first ten Amendments) was added because the guys who wrote the Constitution, could not convince enough people that they had not written the chains that would eventually enslave Americans. These Amendments explicitly spelled out areas where Congress, would have NO power to legislate. The Amendments declared certain areas to be Rights that superseded government (God given or natural rights). They further declared that just because we spelled out some of our Rights, does not mean we do not have a bunch more undeclared. Further, they declared that any duty or power NOT explicitly contained in the Constitution, was reserved by either the States or The People. Keeping and bearing arms is a Right. A Right that supersedes government power. Even if the 2nd Amendment were repealed, or even substituted with an Amendment prohibiting the keeping and bearing of arms, we would still have the Right to keep and bear arms. This is because this Right cannot ever be taken away. It is our Right as human beings, to be armed, to enable us to defend ourselves from those people and those governments that mean to do us harm.
"Never trust a government that does not trust
its own citizens with guns" Pink Pistols survey [Pro-gun homosexual organization] If you are wondering where the other gun organization's surveys are, you will have to ask them. They do not seem to survey libertarians anymore, tiring of being slapped around for their wishy-washy, pro-Republican slavishly sycophantic endorsements.
|
||||
|
|
||||
