Posted on 07/13/2006 12:51:11 AM PDT by neverdem
The public education system has tremendous influence in shaping the views of millions of young Americans. In many cases, the public school system is the only exposure that many children have to the Bill of the Rights. It is imperative, therefore, to ensure that our nation's teachers are enlightening our young people and teaching them correctly about our rights and the meaning behind them. Unfortunately, the overwhelming majority of educators in the United States appear to promote an anti-gun agenda or, at the very least, prefer not to teach the Second Amendment in its true light. We base this opinion, in part, on the fact that the United States Parent-Teacher Association and the National Education Association are both openly anti-gun organizations. We further base our opinion on the fact that the public education system at large seems aligned with the left-leaning socialist agenda that also dominates the dinosaur media and the Democractic Party. These are organizations and individuals who side with the enemy during wartime, attack Christian expression while simultaneously supporting public, other-than-Christian religious expression, and support the licensing and registration of guns while secretly conniving to confiscate every one of them.
These are the same people who try to deny that the Second Amendment applies to you and me, but applies to the National Guard instead. These are the same people who conjured up the term, "assault rifle" in an effort to ban semi-automatic rifles. They claim that when the Constitution was written, the Founding Fathers never intended it to apply to the types of firearm technology available today.
Any red-blooded, patriotic American who understands the true meaning of the Second Amendment is closer in spirit to our Founding Fathers than the sniveling, whiners who call themselves intellectuals. As such, we know that the right to keep and bear arms applies to the American people and is not restricted to muskets. We can further prove the intent of the Founding Fathers by observing how they lived and by reading many of the supporting articles and letters that outline their philosophy on the symbiotic relationship between an armed populace and a government that serves its people.
It is time to demand that our nation's education system duly recognize our Bill of Rights and teach the Second Amendment according to its true intent. You can start by talking to your child and asking them if they are learning about the Constitution in school. If so, take a look at their textbook and see if the Second Amendment is accurately reported. If there is a problem with the textbook or if the Second Amendment is not being taught at all, you may want to talk to your child's principal. You may also want to team up with other parents who share the same views. Teachers have a responsibility to our children and we have a responsibility to see that our nation's teachers are doing their jobs properly.
Jennifer Freeman is Executive Director and co-founder of Liberty Belles, a grass-roots organization dedicated to restoring and preserving the Second Amendment.
http://www.libertybelles.org
jennifer@libertybelles.org
Yep. And almost all protecting concealed weapons.
These fellows would much rather incorporate the second amendment and have five liberal justices define words like "keep", "bear" and "arms". Justices that define nude dancing as protected "speech", but not actual political speech 30 days before an election. Justices that define abortion and sodomy as "privacy" issues. Justices that pervert the meaning of "eminent domain". Justices that define freedom of religion as freedom from religion.
Sure. Let's have them define our RKBA. We'll soon find that "keep" is "kept in a state armory", "bear" excludes carrying concealed and carrying is restricted to "Militia" exercises, and "arms" exclude pistols since the common Militia soldier did not have one.
"But state Constitutions, which these fellows would seemingly hold void, often provide protections for an individual RKBA."
robbie
Yep. And almost all protecting concealed weapons.
Key collectivist word, "almost".
These fellows would much rather incorporate the second amendment and have five liberal justices define words like "keep", "bear" and "arms".
The 2nd has never been un-"incorporated", and courts have no need to define what the 2nd means. -- Only collectivist democrats are confused about its meaning.
Justices that define nude dancing as protected "speech", but not actual political speech 30 days before an election. Justices that define abortion and sodomy as "privacy" issues. Justices that pervert the meaning of "eminent domain". Justices that define freedom of religion as freedom from religion.
None of us are obligated to honor the opinions of justices who mis-'define' the clear words of our Constitution.
Sure. Let's have them define our RKBA. We'll soon find that "keep" is "kept in a state armory", "bear" excludes carrying concealed and carrying is restricted to "Militia" exercises, and "arms" exclude pistols since the common Militia soldier did not have one.
Rant on bobbie.. -- Your hype is an obvious attempt to allow state/local/fed legislators to write laws finding "--- that "keep" is "kept in a state armory", "bear" excludes carrying concealed and carrying is restricted to "Militia" exercises, and "arms" exclude pistols since the common Militia soldier did not have one. --"
The liberal/leftist agenda MUST be eradicated from the school system and the kids need to be introduced to a politically-neutral presentation of the Constitution and all of its Amendments and allow the kids to decide which party they want to follow.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
That isn't going to happen. The leftist/Marxist teachers and lobbying groups are far too entrenched and the children need immediate relief.
The solution is to begin the process of privatizing universal K-12 education. Government schools must eventually be eliminated.
From that point on I have been less suspicious of the public school system
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&7
Gumption,
There are issues by the HUNDREDS that are suspicious.
Please, why on earth are you institutionalizing your children for their education? Do you have a good reason to have to resort to this?
I lived in Cecil County Maryland for 18 years and moved only 5 years ago. I testify that the Maryland schools are a cesspool of liberal/Marxist offal.
It is time to demand that our nation's education system duly recognize our Bill of Rights and teach the Second Amendment according to its true intent.
It is time that we demanded that we begin the process of privatizing universal K-12 education because the Liberal/Marxist teachers and principals will NEVER agree to teach the truth about our Constitution.
You can start by talking to your child and asking them if they are learning about the Constitution in school. If so, take a look at their textbook and see if the Second Amendment is accurately reported.
You can start by removing your child from the government school!
If there is a problem with the textbook or if the Second Amendment is not being taught at all, you may want to talk to your child's principal.
This guy can't be serious. The principal will politely smile, agree with you, and then proceed to turn your child into an American hating, Christian hating robot. If you protest too much, you will find yourself handcuffed and in jail like the Parker guy in Massachusetts.
You may also want to team up with other parents who share the same views.
Absolutely! Team up with other parents and form your own schools or homeschools.
Teachers have a responsibility to our children and we have a responsibility to see that our nation's teachers are doing their jobs properly.
YOU THE PARENT has the responsibility before God and that child to see that they are educated and NOT corrupted by morally bankrupt government teachers and principals.
No. I belive it could be argued that this would be premissable, under the current wording of the Second, but only if there was 100% uninfringed Right to carry openly.
"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it." — Thomas Jefferson
What's better for overall safety? Carrying concealed or carrying openly?
Why are you pushing to make our RKBA a federal issue rather than a state issue, knowing Congress could pass constitutional legislation banning concealed carry?
Debatable. I feel open carry. Added comfort, added deterrent, easier access in a "trouble" situation. More options, including rifles and shotguns, that could be "carried". Cops, military, and security guards carry openly and are rarely "targeted" as some open carry opponents claim.
Why are you pushing to make our RKBA a federal issue rather than a state issue, knowing Congress could pass constitutional legislation banning concealed carry?
A couple of reasons. 1. The Second Amendment. 2. Look at the number of States that are abandoning common sense and freedom in favor of Nazi gun control laws. 3. It's already a "Federal Issue" in case you haven't noticed the BATFE's unConstitutional actions, the NFA of 34', GCA of 68, ect... Even assuming the Courts mistaken finding that the Second only restricts the FedGov, the "F" part of the BATFE shouldn't exist, nor should any of the machine gun/DD/class III bans.
The Right to keep and bear arms codified the Right of a person to protect themselves, their property, and those around them. Part of Washington's disapprobation with the original Colonist militia was that they were woefully under-trained with their privately owned arms. Even for those that had them. During the ratification debates, parts of which I have posted here, the inadequacy of the militia was a constant topic. It was decided that codifying the protection of the Right took the matter out of both the State and the FedGov's hands. Every citizen not subject to incarceration for violating a law was to be allowed their Right to the tool of self defense. There literally was no other way for them to ensure that they would have enough ARMED people show up if they called up a militia for whatever reason.
The ONLY legislation that Congress can Constitutionally pass in regards to RKBA would be regulations for the State militia's when called up. Only active duty militia members would be affected. Other than that, Congress could pass an Amendment repealing the Second Amendment. That is about it.
No mere State level law can negate the Second. States ratify the Constitution upon entering in to the Union. All Amendments are ratified by the States. Via Art 6 para 2, this makes them subject to the Second limitation of "shall not be infringed". Yes, States can makes laws "regulating" the active duty militia. Places of drill. Equipment to be obtained by militiamen wishing to participate. Military law similar to the UCMJ for active duty members. Those are all legitimate militia functions.
Saying that I, as an inactive reserve potential militiamen, cannot carry a firearm for self defense is NOT a legitimate function. Saying that I as an inactive reserve potential militiamen cannot own a certain type of weapon is NOT a legitimate function.
Period. End of story.
Lawmakers, -- Congress/State/local -- cannot pass 'constitutional legislation' that would ban either open or concealed carry, as such 'laws' violate provisions of the 2nd, 10th & 14th amendments.
-- You know this is true paulsen, [you've even in effect admitted it from time to time] -- so why do you post otherwise, - most every day?
Are you obsessed with advocating gun control?
No debate. With concealed carry legal, the bad guys don't know who's carrying. With open carry, they know who their first targets are.
"Look at the number of States that are abandoning common sense and freedom in favor of Nazi gun control laws."
Baloney. Every year more states add concealed carry. What are we up to now, 46?
"Stand Your Ground" bills are now being considered in 21 states, replacing the old "duty to retreat" laws. There is much more tolerance for shooting in self-defense and protecting property.
So some states have laws against "assault-style" weapons. Too bad for them. But that's their prerogative under a federated republic. What we no longer have is a federal AWB. And that's good.
"the "F" part of the BATFE shouldn't exist, nor should any of the machine gun/DD/class III bans."
The BATFE is a licensing and tax collecting agency. Licensing and taxing is not infringement.
"The Right to keep and bear arms codified the Right of a person to protect themselves, their property, and those around them."
Correct. And the person's state constitution protects that right, not the second amendment.
"There literally was no other way for them to ensure that they would have enough ARMED people show up if they called up a militia for whatever reason."
So what? The federal government has the power under Article I, Section 10 to arm them.
"The ONLY legislation that Congress can Constitutionally pass in regards to RKBA would be regulations for the State militia's when called up"
No, under the second amendment, Congress can pass any RKBA legislation they wish that does not affect the forming of a state Militia.
"No mere State level law can negate the Second."
Yes then can and have. The second amendment does not apply to state law. Every single court in every single ruling has stated that.
bookmarking
The second amendment does not apply to state law. Every single court in every single ruling has stated that.
Obsessional, unsupported BS. -- Feel free to continue digging your democratic 'majority rule' hole robbie.
Paulsen:
"--- The second amendment does not apply to state law. --"
Brady Campaign - Myth of the Second Amendment
Address:http://www.bradycampaign.org/facts/issues/?page=second
-- Ms Brady agrees. --
Much debate. CCW limits what you can carry. How fast you can present your firearm to an agressor. And your "first targets" bs kinda falls apart when you consider the number of military, police, and security personnel that carry openly and are never assaulted. Also, refer to the Expansion Westward days when open carry was the standard.
Baloney. Every year more states add concealed carry. What are we up to now, 46?
So, you think jumping through the "guilty until proven innocent" hoops, paying the registration fees, having to register like a sex offender would, this is all what the Founding intent was? I knew you were screwed up, but that is a stretch even for you. There are only 2 States that have "Constitutional" CCW laws. Alaska and Vermont. Of those two, only Alaska has the right idea. Open, concealed, pistol, rifle, shotgun... they don't care. It's only what you DO with it that can get you in trouble.
Also, your post completely ignores all the "assault weapon" bans, "sniper rifle" bans, "Saturday night special" bans, not to mention all the Federal infringements via teh NFA of 34, the GCA of 68, the FOPA of 86, ect...
"Stand Your Ground" bills are now being considered in 21 states, replacing the old "duty to retreat" laws. There is much more tolerance for shooting in self-defense and protecting property.
"Duty to retreat" was another legal fiction that completely defies the now defunct "reasonable man" standard. There never should have been a reason to need to restore justification of deadly force in retaliation for initiation of force.
So some states have laws against "assault-style" weapons. Too bad for them. But that's their prerogative under a federated republic. What we no longer have is a federal AWB. And that's good.
No. It isn't just "too bad for them". Military look weapons are those particularly suited to militia use. One of the stated reasons for individual RKBA is so that an armed citizenry can come to their Nations need bearing suitable arms. No, we don't have the hated Brady Bill any more. But the BATFE is constanly revising their definitions absent any authority to do so and driving more manufacturers and dealers out of business. Also, many States are bringing lawsuites against manufacturers and dealers for Third Party malfeasence. The same as bringing a lawsuite against Oldsmobile for Mary Jo's death at the hands of a drunke Ted Kennedy.
BATFE is a licensing and tax collecting agency. Licensing and taxing is not infringement.
It is when you can neither license nor tax the sale of any new manfucatured Class III weaponry. When the standard for prohibited weapons changes from year to year and without further legislation. And yes Bobby, they defunded the department that allows registration of unregistered firearms. A de facto ban. Automatic felony. If that isn't "infringement", then you obviously don't know what the definition means.
Correct. And the person's state constitution protects that right, not the second amendment.
Wrong again. The US Constitution is binding on the States via ARt 6 para 2. I'm getting tired of telling you this simple fact. Without a "Congress shall make no law" qualifier in the Second Amendment, then "laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding" prohibits it. No matter what your bigoted gun hating judges may have taken it to mean since then.
So what? The federal government has the power under Article I, Section 10 to arm them.
Only if they show up unarmed or with the wrong weapons. Hardly saying that only the FedGov is allowed to arm troops.
No, under the second amendment, Congress can pass any RKBA legislation they wish that does not affect the forming of a state Militia.
Wrong again. "shall not be infringed" still not clear enough for you?
Yes then can and have. The second amendment does not apply to state law. Every single court in every single ruling has stated that.
They have. Yes. This does not mean they had the legal authority to do so. Art 6 para 2. Try reading it some time. Try and wrap that tiny little mind of yours around the whole "laws of any State notwithstanding" part. It means exactly what it says.
I belive it could be argued that this would be premissable
Yeah, you argued it. Gun grabber.
Oh, you never tire of repeating your falsehoods.
"Of this proposition it is enough to say that the article of the Constitution relied upon in support of it does not apply to State but to National legislation." Pervear v. Massachusetts 72 U.S. 475 (1866)
You again. Isn't there some nice traffic you can go play in?
Does your mother know you are using her computer Roscoe?
You invented your "fact". Sourceless, citeless, quoteless. Always.
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
Of course, I already know that the Constitution itself isn't enough of a cite for you, my little sock puppet troll.
Squeek for me again Roscoe.
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.