By George Emanuel
You know we often hear our modern political class, and our own ranks, refer to hunting or shooting tin cans or the ubiquitous target shooting and how they do not want to interfere with our right to pursue these past times. They are only trying to adopt “common sense” gun laws.
Let’s see:
“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”
We know those words as the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution.
Do you see deer, moose, be
ar, rabbit our squirrel mentioned? How about tin cans? Surely target shooting was intended. Guess again! And stop citing these things in the same breath as the Second Amendment.
The left will do that for you because it is to their advantage to popularize their concept of the ‘legitimate’ use of firearms.
In spite of the very plain language in which particularly the original Constitution and its’ first Ten Amendments were written, some jurists believe that it is their duty to interpret what it says and then to tell us what it means. They say it is a “living document”
Bullshit, it is the foundation of our Republic! When foundations move buildings collapse into ruin!
I prefer the approach of the late Justice Antonin Scalia, “The Constitution says what is says, no more, no less” He was a strict Constitutionalist as should be we all.
It has been argued that a well-regulated militia refers to the National Guard, that an individual has no right to firearms for self-defense, that “assault rifles” are not protected by its’ dictates.
Let me be clear again, BULLSHIT!
The Founders intended that we should be able to protect ourselves from the despots who have been trying to steal the precious jewel of freedom from us since the founding.
So, let’s cut the crap and acknowledge that hunting and target shooting have nothing to do with the Constitution. Rather they are constructs of the Liberal Left who would like to seize our power to resist the destruction of our freedoms.
Jefferson eloquently stated that we ‘are endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” These words are from the “Declaration of Independence”
Our Rights come from God! And no one has the authority to take them away, just as we have no authority or ability to surrender them. They are inalienable, you cannot take them or surrender them on my behalf. Is there any part of this that is not clear so far?
OK, so what about the idea of “common sense gun control?” if you are still asking this read on and I will explain further.
The Founders had just won our freedom from a tyrannical King George III. They waged a war with very little by way of arms to resist the most powerful army on earth at the time. Muskets, fouling pieces, (shotguns) and pitch forks quite literally were their weapons. Shop keepers and farmers manned the front lines and the few ships we had at the time.
We prevailed by sheer force of will and a sacrifice which we should pray none of us ever see again.
To ensure that we would have the ability to maintain our free state, (read free state of the individual man) we should always have the means to resist tyranny in all of its ‘forms.
“As civil rulers, not having their duty to the people duly before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as the military forces which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirm
ed by the article in their right to keep and bear their private arms.” – Tench Coxe “Remarks on the First Part of the Amendments to the Federal Constitution,” under the pseudonym “A Pennsylvanian” in the Philadelphia Federal Gazette, June 18, 1789.
Now at the time of the adoption of the Constitution the common arms of Armies were muskets, some few rifles, bayonets and an occasional cannon.
Not coincidentally the shop keepers and farmers had many of the same arms.
There is a word for what happens when each side is more or less equal. It’s called “parity”. This was clearly the Founders intent in the Second Amendment. They intended that we should be able to resist a standing army.
They were very much afraid of a powerful central government. Thus, they vested most powers in the States. But, they put in the Second Amendment to ensure that no tyrant could hope to overcome the people and subjugate and enslave them.
“Domari Nolo” was a very popular theme during the revolution. It is Latin and means, “I will not be subjugated”. The Founders meant exactly that, no more, no less.
Here is Washington on what can only be described as ‘parity’
“A free people ought not only to be armed but disciplined; to which end a uniform and well-digested plan is requisite; and their safety and interest require that they should promote such manufactories as tend to render them independent of others for essential, particularly military, supplies.”
George Washington
Parity then requires that we should have those arms necessary to resist even, God forbid, our own army should it be successfully unleashed upon the citizenry of today or tomorrow. I have more faith in our soldiers, but I am sometimes naive. How about you?
So, we have a right to own AR15s, M14s, M1, M79s, M1A1 tanks, M109 howitzers and FA18 aircraft as well as any other armament which we might one day have aimed against us. In fact, it seems Washington himself has endorsed the idea of a highly armed citizenry
Whether we choose to own any or all of these is not at issue. We have the Right.
After the attack on Pearl Harbor, Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto is attributed with the following words. “I fear that we have awakened a sleeping giant”. that is the part of the quote which is famous. It continued however, “and I fear that should we invade America we will find a rifleman behind every blade of grass” Think about that for a moment.
“that standing army can never be formidable (threatening) to the liberties of the people, while there is a large body of citizens, little if at all inferior to them in the use of arms.” Alexander Hamilton – Federalist Paper #29
The world looks at our freedom and is envious. Not just because we possess it but because we will defend it!
I am not going to dwell on the worlds’ opinion and it’s shifting since 1941, frankly I don’t give a damn what any other countries think of us. I care what we think of us! However, I am afraid, I admit, of snowflakes and their optimistic ignorance.
And I think that when you make the case, or agree that we have a right to hunt, or target shoot, or plink you miss the point of the Second Amendment.
The point of the Second Amendment is that you will always be able to do those things and all of the others for which firearms are used. Not to mention all of the other rights conferred by God upon each of us.
“The Constitution says what it says”
“No more, No less!”
Rest in Peace Antonin Scalia