Trading the Second Amendment for an Illusion of Safety

cnsnews.com ^ | 10/18/2016 | Nelson Lund

[rktman]

The right to keep and bear arms is a vital element of the liberal order that our Founding Fathers handed down to us.

Armed citizens take responsibility for their own security, cultivating the self-reliance and vigorous spirit that are indispensable for genuine self-government.

As I argue in a new essay for The Heritage Foundation, the founders understood that those who hold political power almost always will strive to reduce the freedom of those they rule and that many of the ruled always will be tempted to trade their liberty for empty promises of security. The causes of these political phenomena are sown in the nature of man.

[rktman]

Well, according to just-us breyer of the supremes, the 2nd is about the militia and has nothing to do with individuals. Proof positive that having a law degree and sitting on the supreme court does not mean that you have certain cognitive skills.

[FrankR]

Trading ANY of our rights for ANY liberal promises is totally OUT OF THE QUESTION!

It’s non-negotiable, period!

Our Bill of Rights has a solid track record of keeping us free. Liberals have a proven track record of LYING THROUGH THEIR TEETH. The always have, and always will.

As many Republicans in congress are no members of the underground democrat party. (it’s where the money is), they lie as bad as the regular dems.

The Bill of Rights are not the presidents, or congress’ to give away, or change, or delete. They a contract with American citizens promising us us protection against our own government gone corrupt. They were adopted as safeguards for that very reason.

Any tampering with them should be met with the purpose of them, in a mass uprising of the people.

[Tilted Irish Kilt]

Ping !

[ctdonath2]

A fair reading of the 2nd:
“the existence of a standing army, which we don’t like but recognize is needed for national security, does _not_ justify disarming the populace at large of military armaments.”

[Pollster1]

The article does not directly mention Ben Franklin, so there's his quote on the topic.

As for compromising on any of our fundamental, God-given rights, the answer is "no". If government can amass enough force, they can compel us to obey. Maybe, and only temporarily. However, voluntary compliance with infringements on our God-given rights should never exist.

Religious freedom is nearly absolute. You cannot sacrifice virgins on the alter of liberalism or of any other false god, but there are very few legitimate restrictions on the free exercise of religion 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. This is not "freedom of worship" as liberals try to modify the words in the Amendment for discussion; it's "the free exercise thereof".

Freedom of speech is nearly absolute. We have the nonsense "you can't yell 'fire' in a crowded theater", but that is in no way parallel to the basic rights that liberals are trying to destroy. There should be almost no restrictions on speech short of classified material, libel/slander, and threatening violence. The leftists who want to restrict speech should only be obeyed in the face of an immediate threat of overwhelming government force. They should not be able to expect voluntary compliance or a presumption of legitimacy when they violate that basic God-given right.

The foundation of all our legal rights is the right to keep and bear arms. No one can legitimately take our right to defend ourselves, a right that presumes a right to the means of self-protection. There are few "reasonable restrictions" on that right among the existing laws that infringe on our most basic right and none among proposed new laws. The Founding Fathers wrote that this right "shall not be infringed" to give it the strongest protection of all our constitutional rights, and it deserves that level of respect.

Any government that violates these rights has no legitimacy and deserves no respect. Anny person who gives up those rights is equally deserving of contempt. We cannot compromise with evil in the hope that they will be satisfied with one more infringement on our freedom. By definition, they are never satisfied. We must oppose them with all our energy and in every way. When we lose, we must not comply beyond the level of compliance that the enemies of freedom can immediately compel.

[central_va]

Relative to the population of the USA the standing Army is minuscule and insignificant.

[ctdonath2]

A favorite observation:

Every year, the U.S. Unorganized Militia performs war games. Some 18,000,000 snipers take part in lone-wolf live-fire live-target exercises, each equipped with modern long range rifles, camouflage, mapping, transport, etc all at their own personal expense, and done with a bare minimum of governmental organization. This force is larger than any standing military on Earth, and is dispersed throughout the general population.
Year after year, Operation Deer Season is a resounding success.

[PROCON]

RKBA Ping List

This list is for all things pertaining to the 2nd Amendment.

Please FReepmail me to be added to or deleted from this ping list.

[central_va]

In my county we have to use shotguns so it isn’t really sniping per say. You have to get up close and personal with the SOBs. But your point is well taken.

[Billthedrill]

We seem to keep relearning the same lesson, most lately in Sweden and Germany: making self-protection a function exclusively of the state means that the state can withhold that protection whenever it considers it has a priority higher than the safety of the citizens. Or a portion of the citizens, a specific class: non-party members, racial groups, religious groups. This is not speculation or political theory, we have seen brutal examples of all of these within the last century and some at the present day.

In this sense, giving up firearms and ceding protection to the state means giving up one's individual identity. And the state knows it.

[rktman]

You might want to add this to the pinging for NV:

http://www.breitbart.com/california/2016/10/18/la-times-bloomberg-sponsored-gun-control-californication-nevada/

[NorthMountain]

Year after year, Operation Deer Season is a resounding success.

Define "success" ... I still have to dodge the bloody varmints on the freeway.

[NorthMountain]

In this sense, giving up firearms and ceding protection to the state means giving up one's individual identity. And the state knows it.

We the People know it, too. We the People have been setting gun and ammunition sales records every month for a decade.