The Unconstitutionality of Gun Control
By Dorothy Anne Seese
dottie@politicalusa.com
|
Get
Updates
|
Go ahead and dig out the Bill of Rights. If you don't have one at your desk,
it's easy to locate on the internet. Just as the First Amendment has been bent,
twisted and contorted by judicial opinions unfit for the America of the
Founders, so the Second Amendment has suffered like torture from judicial
decisions and "opinions" from courts based on the bias of the judge
rather than the plain letter of the law. This is what the Second Amendment says:
Article II. 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.
Notice that the emphasis or rationale for unfettered gun ownership is the
security of a free state. The Founders did not form a "more perfect
union" in the sense of a conformed, welded and unseverable Union, but a
unity of purpose where the states were the sovereign entities and the federal
government was highly limited in its duties and powers. All the Founders
had to do to get a new "union" of unfettered central power was either
continue as subjects of the Crown or make a new monarchy. Instead, they
framed a federal republic (which is not
a democracy) and the intent was for each state to have the allegiance of its
citizens. We are called the "United States of America" because
our forefathers agreed to unite as sovereign states with a common name, coinage,
postal service, and certain executive and legislative powers enumerated in the
Constitution, Bill of Rights and the several successive amendments. The
concept of a strong central government was fostered and facilitated at the
expense of over half a million lives during the war between the states.
Now if groups band together under a title "militia" they are
immediately branded as insurrectionists, rebels, Nazis, skinheads, terrorists or
some other fearsome title. Yet what they do is fully constitutional unless
they break some other law, which may also be unconstitutional. That does
not mean criminals are free to run loose in the streets. Indeed, before
this "gun control" flap initiated by the globalists and enemies of a
Free America began to enforce its agenda, people were expected to own guns for
the protection of themselves and their property. Life and property were
held as Values One and Two, respectively. In Arizona, once a wild west
territory, it is now illegal to use lethal force to protect property, and
difficult to use to save one's life. Arizona is now a disaster area of liberal
thought and open borders, number one in violent crime.
Adv:
What
does the government know about you?
The forces, governmental and non-governmental, that want to take away the
guns of the citizens or "register" them are marching in lockstep with
the forces that are taking away our right to use land freely, transferring it at
will to "heritage lands" under the United Nations. Did you,
citizens, authorize the government to give our land to the UN? No?
How did it happen? It happened because most of what the federal government
does has nothing to do with your rights under the Bill or Rights or our
Constitution of free and sovereign states in a voluntary union as a nation.
Why this emphasis on guns? Let me tell you from my email -- because this
government has gone so far afield from the framework of the founders and the
powers delegated to it by the Constitution that we are closer to being serfs
that citizens and closer to being "citizens of the world" than
citizens of our respective states!
That's unconstitutional, illegal, crosswise of the law of the land, and a damned
conspiracy. Then these schemers have the nerve to call those of us who
expose them "conspiracy theorists." No, we're "conspiracy
revealers."
I am sympathetic with those who have lost children or other loved ones at the
hands of killers. However, the gun didn't decide to kill anyone, the
killer did. Australia has gone so far as to ban rocks as lethal weapons if
carried by certain people in protests or in cases of aggravated assault.
Rocks? Yes, anything can be used by one individual to kill another.
There were thousands of years of killing before the invention of guns.
The right of the individual to have a gun is not to be infringed. That
means, in our vernacular, that government has no business sticking its nose into
our possession or non-possession of guns. Period. All governments that
want to oppress the citizenry grab their guns. How about "gun
registration?" Well that's infringement. Do you expect a Mafia or
other gang member to line up and state their purpose for having one or more guns
is to commit crimes? No. That's idiotic. Only law-abiding
citizens will put up with gun registration, and it's about time the citizens
realized that what they are doing is abiding by unconstitutional laws that
infringe on their rights. That is the road to totalitarianism. And then
there's the wimpy excuse "well, I'm not afraid to register my gun, I don't
commit crimes." Of course not. No criminal registers his guns
any more than he fills out an application to commit a crime. Good grief,
use some damned common sense, folks, and figure out what "gun control"
is all about. The problem in this nation is that the citizens take freedom
for granted, and that is precisely why we have so little of it left to us.
Younger folks have no ability to remember when we had a free country, people my
age and older recall a much freer one, and my grandparents recalled a much freer
nation yet. They were pioneers in Arizona Territory!
The use of technology to better the quality of life does not demand surrender of
an equal amount of freedom, which is precisely the non-equation the government
is trying to patch together. That's about as idiotic as trying to explain
the theory of relativity to Einstein, or how a light bulb works to Edison.
Get the Updated Popup Blocker! free download!
There is something in the way of "natural law"
that can be awkwardly stated this way: "When the government begins to
fear the people, it invents good reasons to persuade the citizens that serfdom
offers safety and security when the true objective is enslavement to the
rulers." Please do not quote me on that, work it into a better
natural law and enunciate it in clearer and more concise terms. It is
immaterial who is credited with the words, the objective is to wake the people
out of stupor and call on them to stop surrendering to the forces of evil power
that have taken away the very freedom they are taking for granted. I know
people who actually believe our gold reserves are in Ft. Knox and that we're
still on a hard currency standard. Incredible? Those same people
have told me that we need to give up some of our freedoms for safety.
Yes, it is a temptation to slap the crap out of them. Free people do not
worry about safety and security, they are concerned with liberty. That
statement sank Barry Goldwater's presidential candidacy, people in 1964 had
already become the sucklings of the nanny state and feared a return to personal
responsibility.
Guns are instruments, neutral, they do not go on shooting rampages. People
do. They use the guns for wrong purposes. The same is true of
irresponsible drivers, corrupt officials, and drug dealers. Drugs don't
wander around looking for someone to sniff them or smoke them or inject them.
People sell drugs to people willing to do these things. The blame is
always, always, always and forever on the people, not the objects they use. Get
that straight, please. Any other thinking is blame-shoving or
responsibility-dodging.
People who fear God have little to fear from anything or anyone else.
People who do not fear God have good reason to fear just about everything,
principally death.
However we all have a duty, implied by the Bill of Rights, to keep ourselves,
our families and our nation free from oppressors. It is the well-armed
militias that will get that job done, organized or not.
Any infringement of our right to keep and bear arms is a threat to our entire
freedom. This nation was born in revolution, and the leaders fear another
one by the people who object to more severe oppression than old King George III
ever dreamed of imposing.
Save the tea, throw the corrupt leaders into Boston Harbor.
Keep your guns, ammo and rights free from criminals, especially those in public
office.
|