The founding fathers understood: Guns safeguard liberty

SJ Mercury News ^ | 12/26/02 | Charles Wood

[NormsRevenge]

MANY years ago, my family helped to settle a small town in a foreign country to escape religious persecution. Although distant, the government continued persecution and suppression of dissent -- an activity in which my family was directly involved.

Eventually, uniformed soldiers invaded my family's house, demanded quarters, and searched for guns that were hidden in the house.

[weikel]

The title alone is worth a bookmark.

[Comus]

If Thomas Jefferson came back to life in modern America, his first reaction would be to curse modern Americans as gutless cowards.

[Eala]

Reading the (excellent) book "The Arab Mind," I chanced across this little gem (p.221) that emphasizes the point above:

"The [Arab countries'] governments ... hesitated, at least until the most recent times, to impose their will on the people in matters that the latter opposed. For example, the Iraqi government was unable to carry out a program in 1932 because the people had no less than 100,000 rifles as against the 15,000 owned by the government." (And a ready willingness to use them, I might add...)

[JusticeLives]

Amen, and AMEN.

[11Bush]

And his second would be to begin the process of revolution all over again.

My in-laws, who are a bunch of socialist, are directly linked to TJ. They take great pride in this fact, and I take great pride in pointing out that if TJ was alive today he would disown them.

Molon Labe!

[coloradan]

This column appears to be in rebuttal to "Did the founders want us to have GUNS?" Original article and Free Republic thread.

[Idlewise]

Having the capability to overcome a government that becomes oppressive is the reason for the Second Amendment. Anyone who has read the Declaration Of Independence should understand that having guns or a means to defend freedom is actually a requirement for being a citizen of a free country.
Self defense is both for protection from evil doers who invade your personal residence as well as from governments that attempt to remove your freedom. Hunting for game is one of the benefits and not as necessary anymore since this country is capable of supplying this need.
For these reasons alone I will eventually own a gun some day.

[FreeTally]

I am actually surprised by the number of articles I have read that actually state that a "tyranical government" is not a worry today, thus such justification by the founding fathers for the 2nd Amendment does not apply.

Of course, those who make such comments are just the one's wanting to take away our guns so we can be forced to live up to their agenda.

[coloradan]

A response to a stupid column.

[Gary Boldwater]

I agree. Rifles and pistols are no longer enough to defeat a tyranical govt. Since the Constitution is a "living, flexible document", the right to bear arms should include the right to own tanks, fighter jets, flame throwers and the like. I'm still undecided about nuclear weapons, I at least think the individual states should be allowed to stockpile them rather than individual citizens.

[chuknospam]

bump

[Idlewise]

Thanks. I think that we should have equivalent arms to have a fair fight but the support costs for anything above a rifle or hand gun is way above my salary. Just having sufficient arms to take a stand is actually enough for me as going down without a fight isn't the American way.
Sometimes just standing up and saying no is enough to hold the line and we still have a say in this government process so no need to get the heavy wepons just yet.

[Destro]

safe guard liberty from forces within as well as from forces without. To argue that the right to bear arms was just to use in case of an invasion is wrong.

[GovernmentShrinker]

And you are waiting for ?

[Frohickey]

Sometimes just standing up and saying no is enough to hold the line and we still have a say in this government process so no need to get the heavy wepons just yet.

The time we need heavy weapons is when we have had the light weapons (rifles/shotguns/pistols) taken away.

MOLON LABE

[William Tell]

Gary Boldwater said: "Rifles and pistols are no longer enough to defeat a tyranical govt."

Only if you intend to oppose the tyrannical government at its points of strength. If you attack it at its weak points, the "people" will win. It doesn't take much gasoline to ... Oops. Nevermind.

[Idlewise]

Actually, I have had my Curio & Relic license for a couple of years and have been exercising my right. It's one of the things that makes the Second Amendment real but, it does limit the right to what one may purchase.

[ExSoldier]

Worse...Thomas Jefferson was a Democrat! What do you think he would have to say to the likes of Bill, Hill and little Chuckie Schumer when it comes to the subject of guns? I think this current version of the Democratic Party would make he and the rest of the Framers absolutely RETCH. Imagine what the Southern Democrats of the era of reconstruction would say to these folks? Think they might get tarred and feathered as "carpet baggers" and "scalawags?" I think so.

[coloradan]

If you have to buy a permit to do something, that something is no longer your inalienable right to do, but rather a government-granted (and government-revocable) privilege, which you are allowed to do at the pleasure of your masters.