A Discussion of the 2A Discussion of the 2ndnd Amendment Amendmentto the U.S. Constitutionto the U.S. Constitution

A Discussion of the 2A Discussion of the 2ndnd Amendment Amendmentto the U.S. Constitutionto the U.S. Constitution

What does it even mean?What does it even mean?

“The Bill of Rights is the collective* name for the first ten amendments to the United States Constitution, a document which limits the power of the U.S. federal government. These limitations serve to […affirm, and thus…] protect the natural rights of liberty and property including freedoms of religion, speech, a free press, free assembly, and free association, as well as the right to keep and bear arms….”

First, what is the Bill of Rights?

From Wikipedia…

*That’s the ONLY thing “collective” about them; our rights are NOT “collective!”

The purpose of the U.S.

Bill of Rightswas and is NOT,

in fact, to grant these enumerated rights

to U.S. citizens! Clearly, our citizens already had these

rights!

The unambiguous purpose of the Bill of Rights was to

affirm the inalienable rights ALREADY assured ALL

human beings! (…and granted by God!!)

Again, the Bill of Rights thus, indisputably, restricts the power of the government and

NOT the people!

(The Bill of Rights also doesn’t establish the militia either!)

“….And yet the same revolutionary beliefs for which our forebears fought are still at issue

around the globe -- the belief that the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state,

but from the hand of God….”John F. Kennedy’s Inaugural Address

January 20, 1960

Let’s examine what the authors and founders meant when they created the 2ND Amendment to the Bill of Rights! Before we do,

note the following…

“The first and governing maxim in the interpretation of a statute is to discover

the meaning of those who made it.” James Wilson, an original Supreme Court Justice

(This means: Do not spin your “interpretation“to fit your political agenda, or to suit your pals!)

The Second Amendment:

“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.”

What does this mean?

NOTE: First, we must define militia, given that the primary ploy used by 2nd Amendment

revisionists is to purposely pervert the definition of the “militia!”

They do this to misrepresent the right to keep and bear arms as a “collective” rather than

individual right, even though that position is entirely inconsistent with the clear intent of the entire Bill of Rights that points to individuals!

So it’s critical to make clear what the authors meant by the militia!

"A militia, when properly formed, are in fact

the people themselves... and include all men capable

of bearing arms."

Richard Henry Lee, signer of the U.S. Declaration of Independence

What is the militia?

Also, personnel in the military almost invariably

wear standard, issued uniforms

Militia personnel virtually without exception do NOT

wear uniforms! These private citizens typically wear their own clothing!

ANOTHER SIMPLE FACT: Further, this reference to the “militia” was only added to the 2nd Amendment

after much discussion and after several early versions which did not even mention it!

During the 1788 ratification debates, the fear that the federal government would disarm the people in

order to impose rule through a standing army or select militia was pervasive in Antifederalist

rhetoric! I.e., they did not want any wording that would lead to infringement of the basic inalienable

and personal right to keep and bear arms. They KNEW what the anti-gunners would try to do!!

Thus, both Federalists and Antifederalists alike agreed during the ratification process that the right to keep and bear arms was

fundamental to the newly formed system of government, and not derived from the

need for the United States to have a militia.

ALL this was and is clearly and unambiguouslydocumented, so there is no excuse for

anyone to misunderstand this!

In fact, the militia reference was included because of the pivotal contributions our militia made to the

Revolutionary cause, since the British military, with its adherence to Napoleonic tactics, was hard-

pressed to deal with the guerilla-like tactics of a properly-utilized militia!

(e.g., during the pivotal Battle of Cowpens)

Clearly, the purpose of the 2nd Amendment is not to somehow “establish,” the militia as

revisionists also unhesitatingly and disengenously claim. That issue, in fact, is specifically addressed

elsewhere in the U.S. Constitution

There is also no basis in the claim that the meaning or purpose of the Second Amendment changes over

time, or somehow depends on whether or not the services of the

militia are needed at the time or not!In fact, the idea behind the militiais that it can be mobilized quickly

any time it’s needed!(And no one can predict when that might be!)

And if change to our Constitutionis needed, the process for

amending it is also clearly andunambiguously defined!

And it is an open DEMOCRATICprocess!

(Which may be a big problem for some!)

In fact, WWII Japanese Admiral Yamamoto knew damn well what is meant by “The Militia!”

The statement that the militia shallconsist of all able-bodied…persons is also embodied in most state constitutions, in

original versions and updates, viz.,Alabama, Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, GeorgiaIdaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky,

Louisiana, Main, Maryland, Michigan, Mississipi, Missouri, Montana, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, South Carolina,

South Dakota, Utah, Virginia, Washington, and Wyoming.

Now that the authors’ meaning Now that the authors’ meaning of “militia” is clear, does the of “militia” is clear, does the

22ndnd Amendment affirm individual Amendment affirm individual rights, or is it still somehow rights, or is it still somehow restricted to some sort of restricted to some sort of

collective rights?collective rights?

“[T]he said Constitution [should] be never construed…to prevent the people of the

United States, who are peaceable citizens, from

keeping their own arms.”

Samuel Adams, signer of the Declaration, “Father of the

American Revolution”

“The right of self-defence is the first law of nature: in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest limits possible. Wherever…the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any color or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction.” from Blackstone’s Commentaries

St. George Tucker, a leader of the 1786 Annapolis Convention that led to the convening to the Constitutional Convention, law professor in the college of William & Mary, justice on the VA Supreme Court and federal judge under James Madison.

“The right…of bearing arms…is declared tobe inherent in the people.”

Fisher Ames, a framer of the Second Amendment in the First Congress.

“The great object is that every man be armed….every one who is able may have a gun. But we have not learned by experience that, necessary as it is to have arms, …it is still far from not being the case.”

Patrick Henry, Governor, patriot, leader

“No [citizen] shall bedebarred the use of arms

within his own lands.”Thomas Jefferson,

U.S. President,signer of the Declaration

of Independence

“To preserve liberty, it is essentialthat the whole body of the people

always possess arms, and be taught alike,especially when young, how to use them.”

Richard Henry Lee, signer of the Declaration,and a framer of the Second Amendment

The Dred Scott DecisionThe Dred Scott DecisionIn the 1856 Supreme Court decision Dred Scott v. Sandford, the majority opinion cautioned that if negroes were given the full rights of citizenship, they would [God forbid!] be “…entitled to the privileges and immunities of citizens… and…would exempt them from the operation of the special laws …”The Court majority also warned that “….it would give them the full liberty of speech in public and in private upon all subjects upon which its own citizens might speak; to hold public meetings upon political affairs, and to keep and carry arms wherever they went!”

The Court denied Black folks arms by denying them citizenship!

The First Gun Control Laws in the United StatesFollowing “The War of Northern

Aggression,” (Civil War) Democrats in the South passed laws to severely

restrict the rights of its Black citizens. Thus, the first gun

control laws in the U.S. wereactually Jim Crow laws specificallyimplemented to keep Black folks

from protecting themselves and their families from harm.

In particular, the harm came in the form of very bad guys in white

sheets, who were the enforcement arm of the Democratic party!

With the Civil War ending, the question of the rights of freed slaves to carry arms and to belong to militia came to the attention of the Federal courts. In response to the

problems freed slaves faced in the Southern states, the 14th Amendment

was drafted to protect the rights of ALL citizens by keeping Southern Democrats

from making laws targeting our Black citizens!100% of the Democrats in Congress voted

AGAINST it!

When the amendment was drafted, Rep. Bingham used the Court's own phrase "privileges and immunities of citizens" to include the first eight Amendments of the

Bill of Rights under its protection and guard these rights against state legislation. The debate in the Congress

on the 14th Amendment after the Civil War also concentrated on what the Southern States were

doing to harm the newly freed slaves. One particular concern was the disarming of former slaves.

Representative John Armor Bingham of Ohio was the principal framer

of the 14th Amendment.

Bingham, by the way, also made it very clear at the time that the

14th Amendment did NOT confer birthright citizenship on anyone born

in the United States, but only to children of parents subject to our laws, i.e., who were U.S. citizens,

and NOT of persons who were merely visiting our country!

(Get it?)(Get it?)

Union veterans Col. William C. Church &Gen. George Wingate formed the, NRA, National Rifle Association in 1871, originally as an organization with a goal to improve citizen marksmanship, given that the typical Union soldier was a lousy shot!

Civil War Gen. Ambrose Burnside, who was also the former governor of Rhode Island and a U.S. Senator, became the fledgling NRA's first president. Recent members includeJohn F. Kennedy.

The meaning of the 2nd Amendment as an individual right did not begin to get challenged until well into the

20th century, more than 150 years after the Bill of Rights was adopted.

It was this change that motivated the membership of the NRA to have the organization take up the battle protecting the 2nd Amendment rights of our citizens, thus becoming the oldest civil rights organization in

the United States!

Most creatures on earth can and do protect themselves and their offspring, and often fellow members of their

species, from harm by predators

Why then are humans granted less “rights” than animals to protect themselves?

SAD FACT: Mankind is the ONLY creature on this earth that denies

fellow members of its own species the right to defend their own lives and that of their families, including

their offspring, from predators!

Why? Because it’s not really about guns, it’s actually all about control!

Hitler Qaddafi Mao Stalin

Castro Pol Pot Kim Jong Mentally Ill Idi Amin

…ALL experts in Gun Control!

Although some try it in the U.S. through end-around gamesor by the back door, instead of direct confiscation, e.g., through U.N. “treaties” or by trafficking guns into the hands of criminals,

i.e., Mexican drug gangs, such as in the “Fast and Furious” scheme to blame gang shootings in Mexico on U.S. gun dealers and “lax” U.S. gun laws! (Two U.S. Federal officers and over 200

Mexicans have been murdered as a result of this scheme!)

Despite misleading government claims that allege that “…90% of the guns recovered by Mexican authorities from drug gangs were traced to U.S. gun stores and sold due to

‘lax’ U.S. gun laws”, in fact, almost 90% of the recovered weapons were real military

hardware and came from international sources, & Mexican military and police,

NOT “U.S. gun stores!”

With unlimited funds available, Mexican druglords do not need to send

straw buyers to our gun stores to buy weapons!

Of the 11-12% of the recovered guns that were traced, almost 90% were, in fact, trafficked into

Mexico under a program planned and run by the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms,AKA, USBATF, which was, in turn, directed to

do so by the U.S. Justice Department!

This is the program known as “Fast and Furious!”

The response of the Eric Holder and his “Departmentof Justice” has been to STONEWALL any Congressional investigation of this mess!

Sadly, it took a landmark civil rights case before the U.S. Supreme Court to reaffirm that the individual’s right of our citizens to keep and bear arms, for traditionally lawful purposes (such as in self-defense within the home) in federal enclaves (D.C.) ; and that it is not merely a collective right granted members of the militia. District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)

In another landmark decision, the U.S. Supreme Court determined

that the 2nd Amendment applies to the individual states. The Court held that the right of an individual to "keep and bear arms" protected by the Second Amendment is incorporatedby the due process clause of the 14th Amendment and, thus,

applies to the states. The decision cleared up the uncertainty left after District of Columbia v. Heller as to the scope of gun

rights in regard to the states. McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. 3025, 130 S.Ct. 3020 (2010),

Sadly, both of these criticaldecisions were 5 to 4. In other

words, four of the nine justices in each of these two cases

failed (or refused) to grasp or understand the plain languageof the Bill of Rights, the historybehind these amendments, aswell as the well-documented

intent of the framers and authors of our Constitution

When you call them, the police will arrive in minutes…when seconds count!!

Why is self-protection necessary?

FACT #1: The U.S. Supreme Court has already ruled that the police have NO obligation to protect U.S. citizens!

FACT #2: About 99.9% of the time, the police will arrive after the crime has occurred. (to deal with what the criminals DID!) And in the case of mass shootings like Columbine, they will NOT enter the scene until it’s clear that it’s safe for the police! Typically they take an HOUR before they even enter.

Fact #3: About 65 million armed U.S.citizens who own hundreds of million guns, and who commit

absolutely no crimes at all!

Fact #4: It’s the BAD guys we have to worry about!

A Tale of Two Cities:

Thousands of U.S. citizens legally own and carry thousands of handguns in El Paso, Texas. The city averages only five (5) murders a year!

Just across the border in Jaurez, Mexico, it’s virtually IMPOSSIBLE for private citizens to

legally purchase or own a handgun. The typical murder rate in that city is well over 2000 a year. Again, it’s the BAD guys we have to

worry about!

Fact #5 Virtually all mass shootings in the U.S.: Luby’s Cafeteria in Killeen TX, Virginia Tech,

several post offices, McDonalds in San Ysidro, CA; Columbine High School, Cleveland Elementary

School in Stockton CA, Red Lake Senior High School, Binghamton NY Immigrant Community Center,

Ecole Polytechnique (Canada), Ft. Hood, Killeen TX….

ALL took place in statutory “gun-free” zones,which are really virtual “Shooting Galleries”

filled with helpless targets for the criminals to gun down!

Criminals are NOT deterred by “Gun Free Zone” signs!

Violating the law is what criminals do!!!

But NO SHOOTINGS have occurred at anyNRA conventions, gun shows, etc.!

In fact, crime dropped virtually to zero in the entire city of Charlotte, NC when the NRA

held its 2010 annual convention there!

Crime has dropped in N.C. by over 37%since shall-issue concealed carry was made the law in the state. Anti-gunners were able to get parks and rec areas, etc. off limits to concealed

carry. Not surprisingly, the crime rate in these areas has NOT dropped as with the rest of the state

In fact, crime has also dropped significantlyall over the U.S. since the late 80’s in states that have implemented “concealed carry!” It’s dropped far less, or not at all in states

that have resisted it!

Well…how then do you explain the horrible mass shooting in a parking lot in Tucson, Arizona on 8 Jan 2011? Yes, this was not a Yes, this was not a ““Gun-Free zone!” Gun-Free zone!” This massacre took the lives of federal judge John Roll, 9 year old Christina Taylor Green and 3 other innocent people, as well as wounding 12others, including loved and respected U.S. Congresswoman Gabby Giffords?

Note that his shooting was done by a local, Jared Loughner. (known by many in the area to be unstable and erratic!) How could he even buy a handgun?

What we do know is that in direct contravention of commonsense practice by law enforcement across the U.S., Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik (D) compromised the criminal prosecution against Loughner when he used the pulpit happily provided by the “news” media right after the tragedy to publicly blab time and time again for any TV station or network about the case.

We also know that Dupnik, a Democrat, used the forum provided by an all-too-agreeable TV networks, etc. to also shoot off his mouth to bash and blame any and every non-Democrat or “political enemy” Dupnik could think of for the tragedy, including Rush Limbaugh, Talk Radio, conservatives, etc., etc. Further,at no time did Dupnik provide any facts to back up his accusations, and at no time did any TV reporter or journalist (except Megyn Kelly, Fox News) ask for any or question his claims!!

In fact, many used the opportunity created by Dupnik to join in on the political chorus against anyone “…to the right of President Obama!...” AND TO CALL FOR A WHOLE SLEW OF NEW GUN CONTROL LAWS!

What was really going on here?

What quickly became inescapably obvious was that Sheriff Clarence Dupnik’s public rant was

nothing more than his own diversionary smoke-screen to shift attention from what was Dupnik’s unambiguous responsibility

for the tragedy!

Interestingly, people who knew Loughner knew that he didnot even listen to talk radio, read conservative literature, and was basically apolitical. That’s not all they knew either!

INESCAPABLE CONCLUSIONSINESCAPABLE CONCLUSIONS

• In addition to involuntary commitment , this alone is sufficient to fail the FBI NICS background check for handguns.

In fact…. about 2.5 million times a year, armed citizens stop a crime

in its track, all on their own*. Overwhelmingly they did not

even have to fire a shot!

(*Of course, unarmed citizens virtually NEVER stop a crime! They almost

ALWAYS just become victims!)

From Women’s Aid “Act”

One fourth of womenwill be abused by theman they live with. One third of the women who are murdered are killed by their own partner (the guy whose job it was to look out for them!)

The best protection against abuse (and also attack and rape) is being an armed woman!

One question you really One question you really need to ask yourself and need to ask yourself and resolve in your own mind: resolve in your own mind: Is a woman who has been Is a woman who has been raped, strangled with her raped, strangled with her own pantyhose and lying own pantyhose and lying dead in an alley some-dead in an alley some-where morally superior to where morally superior to a woman who, instead, a woman who, instead, blew the bastard away? blew the bastard away? Sadly, I suspect that most Sadly, I suspect that most of the anti-gun crowd of the anti-gun crowd would say “Yes!”would say “Yes!”

In the name of “gun safety”and control, is this what you

really want?(Click on the picture below!)

Thanks for the opportunityto share all this with you!

Mel Morgansteinmelm@carolina.rr.com

704-258-3332