Posted on 10/07/2017 2:19:46 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
The 2nd Amendment is designed to protect Americans from Demonicrats.
Would our forefathers want us owning AR15s? You betcha.
I don’t believe in these rights just because they’re in the Constitution. They’re in the Constitution because we believe they are “God-given and preceding the Constitution.”
Bump
Our government is in place to serve the people. Once our government removes our tools of protection, our government immediately becomes our master.
DO NOT BE AFRAID OF YOUR GOVERNMENT. Let your senators and representatives know exactly how you feel.
Freedom from tyranny is our God given right and guns are the means to protect that.
Dunno Chris, perhaps maybe guns gave us the Constitution? Maybe?
The God given rights are the rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The firearm, as an individual liberty bestowed to all citizens in the Constitutional Republic we call the United States of America, provides protection to the same.
JoMa
Not at all surprising, from the crowd who believes themselves to be the highest moral authority.
The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
You should post this on every gun control or anti-Trump thread.
Dangerous Freedom..
Or
Peaceful Slavery.
Well, Chris, it all starts way before Black’s Law, which merely codified personal weapons.
In United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1875), in a 5-4 majority opinion (and where the dissenters didn't explicitly reject this part), the Court said:
6. The right to bear arms is not granted by the Constitution; neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. The Second Amendments means no more than that it shall not be infringed by Congress, and has no other effect than to restrict the powers of the National Government.
...and...
The right there specified is that of "bearing arms for a lawful purpose." This is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. The second amendment declares that it shall not be infringed, but this, as has been seen, means no more than that it shall not be infringed by Congress. This is one of the amendments that has no other effect than to restrict the powers of the national government, leaving the people to look for their protection against any violation by their fellow citizens of the rights it recognizes...
Perhaps some feel it antiquated, but St George Tucker may have nailed it (without the internet or a Whole Foods!!) in 1803 when he wrote:
This may be considered as the true palladium of liberty. . . . The right of self defence is the first law of nature
Would George Washington go a Colt or a DPMS?
"If they bring a knife to a fight, we bring a gun"
Yeah, “gun” rights are NATURAL rights, and by NATURE they “precede” the Constitution.
One does not “grant” rights. They are part of nature. The Constitution/BOR only RECOGNIZES and ACKNOWLEDGES those NATURAL rights. To be clear to anyone that indeed, they will not abridge what comes naturally.
In other words, it is a lot worse than just the comments on your list.
Oh yes it does. Because indeed, defending oneself is NATURAL as is surviving by finding food.
Yes, it was also recognized that groups of people might defend themselves against their own government, but that does not preclude enshrining basic criminal defense or hunting.
These are all natural rights, and the point of the BOR was to ensure they were recognized and not ignored/violated.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.