Today a fellow Patriot posted on her facebook wall.
Irish Rogue’s take on 2A:
Another shooting has happened in Orlando, and with that the gun control debate has re-ignited. I’ve heard many debates for and against gun control and it has compelled me to give my little weigh-in on the subject.
Today I’m going to fixate on what I call the “context” debate. The context debate tends to focus on the guns of the time, the single shot, undependable, difficult-to-aim musket. For starters, the musket of 1789 was considered just as deadly by the people of the time as the AR-15 is considered today. The men who wrote the Bill of Rights wrote the 2nd Amendment thinking about the deadliest weapon in the world. Considering the fact that there will always be “The deadliest weapon in the world”, then technically the 2nd Amendment is timeless.
But those are the technicalities. That debate is exhausting and futile, it’s a rabbit’s hole. We can argue about the number of rounds in a magazine, automatic, semi-automatic, and caliber until the end of days. We can ban all guns, and a lunatic with murder on his mind will still figure out how to get a gun and murder.
Music comes from musicians, the instrument is just that, an instrument. Murder comes from murderers, the gun is simply the instrument. The debate must be focused on the murderer, not the instrument, the murderer will always find a way to murder, especially if we continue focusing on the instruments.
Now…back to the context debate. Let’s go back to 1789. The United States is still incredibly young, it still has that “New Country” smell, which is a mixture of blood, sweat, tears and gunpowder. The United States was born out of revolution, and guns were the contractions of the labor that resulted in that birth.
The founders were smartly aware of the dangers of an oppressive government, they were smartly aware of what can happen when a government becomes too oppressive, they understood that simply promising to not be oppressive was not enough for anyone, especially for a people who were still licking their wounds and building their new lives, so the Founders backed up that promise with an agreement known as the 2nd Amendment.
When I read the 2nd Amendment, this is what I am reading, “We revolted against an oppressive government, guns were required for this revolution. Now you are trusting us to form a government that will not oppress, that will respect your newly found freedom, and to respect it until the end of time. We promise to never take away your guns. We promise we will never take away your ability to overthrow us, to have another revolution if that’s what we deserve.”
The 2nd Amendment is the ultimate show of respect for our fellow citizens and our country. For that reason, I will always oppose anyone who threatens to weaken the 2nd Amendment, or any of our first ten Amendments for that matter.
“I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical.”
-Thomas Jefferson, from a letter to James Madison, 1787
It’s sad that this blogger is afraid to speak his or her mind because they live in the “People’s Republic of Madison” The blogger is correct though, in fact it probably should be the first amendment as it is the amendment that protects the constitution and all of the other amendments. But let’s put the second amendment in proper perspective.
“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.”
For that we need a little historical perspective.
From the debates on the ratification of the Constitution.
“Mr. George Mason. Mr. Chairman, a worthy member [Volume 4, Page 567] has asked who are the militia, if they be not the people of this country, and if we are not to be protected from the fate of the Germans, Prussians, &c., by our representation? I ask, Who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers. But I cannot say who will be the militia of the future day. If that paper on the table gets no alteration, the militia of the future day may not consist of all classes, high and low, and rich and poor; but they may be confined to the lower and middle classes of the people, granting exclusion to the higher classes of the people. “
Indeed that was the case. During the Revolutionary War it was local militia’s that kept the enemies at bay until the Regulars (Army) could get there. They were armed citizens (armed with their own weapons and ammunition).
Here’s George Washington speaking on how the over use of militias was effecting the food supplies.
“The frequent calls upon the militia have interrupted the cultivation of the Land, and of course have lessened the quantity of its produce, occasioned a scarcity, and enhanced the prices. In an army so unstable as ours, order and economy have been impracticable. No person, who has been a close observer of the progress of our affairs, can doubt that our currency has depreciated without comparison more rapidly from the system of short enlistments, than it would have done otherwise.”
Again militia’s were armed local people as can be seen by this extensive list of militias who fought in the Revolutionary war. If the leftist were correct in saying that they meant the National Guard there would have only been 13 militias. That was not the case. As a matter of fact throughout history our people have always been responsible for their own defense. Even local law enforcement relied on Posses to help keep the peace.
[Latin, Power of the county.] Referred at Common Law to all males over the age of fifteen on whom a sheriff could call for assistance in preventing any type of civil disorder.
This can be clearly shown by when the James Gang tried to rob a bank in Northfield, Minnesota.
“The citizens of Northfield ran to surround the bank and mercilessly shot down the robbers as they tried to escape. A 19-year-old medical student killed one gang member, Clell Miller, while the owner of the Northfield hardware store mortally wounded Bill Chadwell, peppering his body with bullets from a rapid-firing Remington repeater rifle. Jesse’s brother, Frank, was hit in the leg, while their criminal partners–Jim, Cole, and Bob Younger–were also badly wounded.”
It was not until the progressive era that the government should take care of us and that they and only they had the wisdom how to do it best. But what’s even funnier is the fact that at every turn the so called liberals bash the police force and depict them as racist murders out of one side of their mouth while out of the other they make the claim that only the police should be armed. But this hypocrisy shows up in all of their policies but I digress.
The real problem with the police forces is not that they are incapable. It is the fact that they are no longer there to “Protect and Serve” as apparent by the removal of that slogan from most police cars. They are the collection arm of state and local governments and at the mercy of their handlers. As was apparent during the “Black Lies Matters” protest where massive burning and looting took place and the police were told to stand down as the Politicians (the polices handlers) were afraid of the political fallout. Of course Milton Friedman was talking about monetary greed in this piece but the concept still holds.
Any one that has followed me or read my blogs knows that I’m no fan of Donald Trump and will not vote for him, but his supporters were attacked by a leftist mob while the government police force stood by and did nothing.
But this just reinforces the immoral words of Ronald Reagan.
The most terrifying words in the English language are: I’m from the government and I’m here to help.”
Thankfully there are those in law enforcement who are willing to speak the truth. And the truth is that in spite of leftist rhetoric, your defense is not only your responsibility, it is your right.