Whether repeal of the Second Amendment is feasible or not and, it’s not, revisionist history is meant to purposely distort its meaning into irrelevancy. Former Justice Stevens claims that his conception of gun rights is “uniformly understood” yet offers no legal precedent to back up the contention. Stevens claims that the Second Amendment’s explicit mention of the right of “the people” does not create an “individual right,” despite the inconvenient fact that within the Bill of Rights, the term “the people” is mentioned, in the Fourth, Ninth and Tenth Amendments. All of these amendments have been found to protect the Individual Rights of the People (Not to mention the Fact that The U.S. Supreme Court has, in fact, decided the Second Amendment IS an individual Right. Heller v D.C.)
The debate over the Second Amendment centered on a dispute over who should control the militia: the federal government or state governments. Every man understood that he may be called upon not only to defend his family, community and, his country from invaders (And, sometimes defend himself against his own government).
“In the writings and speeches of the American founders, the threat of disarmament was always a casus belli, which makes sense for practical and ideological reasons. None of the God-given or Natural rights codified in the Constitution not freedom of speech, press, or religion, or the ability to vote or demand due process had a longer or deeper history in English Common Law and tradition than the Right to Defend oneself.”
Noah Webster reasoned: “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 bands of regular troops.” How ironic the “whole of the people” has forgotten this legacy, this historical fact.
In another recent essay, “7 Terrible Gun Control Arguments…And How to Beat Them“, there is a “picking apart” of the “arguments” of the Left. Alas, there can be no critical discourse with the Left. There can be no dialog when one side starts off the conversation with misleading statements or lies.
One of my fellow WordPress contributors is…well, insane. She regularly criticizes anything conservative. She craps all over the Constitution and the Bill of Rights with impunity and ease. This week, she made the mistake of referring to my writings as obnoxious and “aggressive”. She’s upset that I take her and her followers to task for their coo-coo for cocoa puffs rantings. This was my reply to her:
“Most of your readers are leftist, liberal, socialists…etc. And no, I’m not making threats. I never say anything I’m not willing to back up with actions. That’s what’s called being adult. One cannot have “civil discourse”, as you say when the other side begins everything with a lie. Liberals almost without exception, begin every argument/conversation with a lie. It’s not always intentional, sometimes it’s just ignorance based on believing everything they see and hear from the mainstream media. One cannot engage in civil or critical discourse with a party incapable of critical thought.
Funny how you people on the left name call and use words like “obnoxiously” when confronted with facts that contradict your own belief system. You disregard the Rights of others because of your feelings. One cannot intelligently talk about issues when your feelings run your mouth. You call my speech aggressive. I call you weak-minded and unable to openly discuss issues. I like many Americans, are sick to death of the liberal left. And, we will not compromise Our Rights, hence the election of President Trump. The ballot-box is us playing nice. You keep pushing us towards that corner, and you won’t like what comes next. That’s not a threat. That’s a warning from Americans who have awakened and won’t be pushed any longer.”
And, my “feelings” are reflected in the Latin term casus belli. This term means an event or political occurrence that brings about a declaration of war. Here’s a little gun confiscation history we would all do well to remember.
“In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.
China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.
Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
56 million defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control. You won’t see this data on the US evening news, or hear politicians disseminating this information.
Understand, the Bill of Rights is a Negative list of Rights. The document lists our God-given or Natural Rights to self-defense. The term “Negative list of Rights”, refers to the Fact that these codified Rights are restrictions placed upon the government and NOT Individuals.
You on the Left, so-called Democratic politicians and others who believe you can and will disarm the American people, you are wrong. To repeal the Second Amendment would have no more effect than if one removes all references to the Ten Commandments from the public venue. The ideas and principles are still present and people are stilling willing to Die for their beliefs. Are YOU, on the left, willing not just to Kill but to Die for your beliefs? Because I can tell you, there are Tens-of-Millions or more of us willing to KILL you in defense of Everyone’s Freedom and Liberties as guaranteed by the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of these United States.
Remember, attempts to disarm the American people will result in a casus belli event that will have lasting effects on Our country’s future. The “right” virtually corners the market when it comes to well-educated, well-trained and, experienced warfighters. Past and present members of the Special Operations Group (Special Forces, Delta Force, Navy SEALS…etc) even sent a letter to then President Obama warning him that civilian disarmament would not be tolerated. In fact, the letter clearly stated their hearts and efforts would go to protect the Rights of the American people in support of the Constitution. Those of you on the Left would do well to take heed of these facts.
Fingers on Fire 
so are you advocating armed rebellion should a state decide through their court system that they do not wish their citizen to keep ar-15’s and any other guns that look similar to them?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes. We are speaking of a Constitutional issue. The people should make the decision. Courts DO NOT make “law.” They interpret laws. State legislators legislate laws per The People. No offense intended, but people like you Are the problem. You have NO understanding of your own government works, its limitations or what branches are responsible for what. Constitutional issues SHOULD be placed on a BALLOT not a court docket!
LikeLike
sure made a lot of assumptions there. I have quite a lot of understanding how government works. I was asking what you personally were advocating. By doing so, you yourself are in violation of 18 US Code 2383. Not a pleasant place to be. And yes, you are correct in that Constitutional issues need to be placed upon ballots, then 2/3 of the States must ratify before the Constitution may be changed.
LikeLike
Per the Declaration of Independence, I have not only the duty but, the Right to Abolish the current form of Government if I and my countrymen agree that it should be done. And you, obviously DO NOT have an understanding of the Constitution, specifically the Bill of Rights.
“Removal of the Second Amendment would change Nothing in regards to the Right of self-defense. The Bill of Rights is a list of “Negative Rights.” That is, a “negative right”, requires the Government to abstain from interfering with your actions as codified in the Bill of Rights. In other words, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights places restrictions on the GOVERNMENT, not the Governed. The Bill of Rights only codifies (places into writing…for those of you with a limited vocabulary), Our God or Naturally given Right to self-preservation or “Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness…” Note, not the guarantee of any of the aforementioned. Of all of the Rights listed in the Bill of Rights, the Second IS the most important. Without that Specific Right, none of the other Rights could be defended by the populace.” -from my essay here on wordpress. https://gunfighter32908.com/2018/03/06/the-ignorance-from-leftist-masquarading-as-intellectuals-never-ends/
LikeLike
yea…………well. repeat away as much as you want. Your interpretation of the Constitution isn’t what counts when it gets down to the nitty gritty. It is what the supreme court has decided. In the meantime, try to control that temper..a stroke is a possibility in someone that rages as much as you seem to.
LikeLike
Educate yourself. The Supreme Court HAS decided the issue. The Second Amendment IS an Individual Right. Also, the 2nd Amendment applies to guns “In Common Use.” The AR series of guns IS the most popular semi-automatic rifle in America and the WORLD next to the AK series of weapons. I own both and WILL NEVER surrender them just as the >100,000 in CT and NY who also have NOT complied and registered or turned in their falsely named “Assault weapons.”
LikeLike
It’s NOT my Interpretation of the Constitution. It the founding fathers words. It’s the words of various Federal Courts throughout Our history’s words. There MILLION of Americans who REFUSE to comply and, in fact, Fight to the death to defend and preserve Our (yours and my) RIGHTS. Millions of Active/Retired military, law enforcement and everyday Americans say NO. Attempt to take our firearms, and you will have a Civil War on your hands. Those of us in the above category are the ones who have been trained to engage in lethal confrontation. Those of us in the military, past and present, WILL BE the ones who train people now and will continue to do so. Those opposed to gun ownership of ANY particular type of firearm will be no match for us. The civil war will be short-lived. Even Active Duty Special Forces soldiers sent an open letter to then President Obama that they would NOT comply with orders to confiscate weapons or fire upon the American people. They stated that they would Support and Defend the Constitution and Back the American people. Therefore, I’m fairly confident that fighting us in order to take guns would be a massive miscalculation.
LikeLike
you’ve obviously been listening to alex jones. I am sorry for you.
LikeLike
Typical Liberal move. Don’t debate Actual Law or the issue, just call me crazy. I do not listen to Alex Jones because he is Off by a lot. You’re an intellectual FRAUD. DEBATE my point of view and Existing Law to include Federal Case law. You Can’t because you DO NOT know what you’re talking about.
LikeLike