Our linear-thinking founders chose to compose the Bill of Rights delineating those rights in order of importance.
"Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,
or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to
assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
The First Amendment affirms our rights to freely express ourselves - to speak our mind; to practice - or not - a religious belief system; to peaceably come together in a group of unspecified size for an unspecified purpose; and to "petition the Government" if they are doing something which we believe is not in the public interest.
The First Amendment has been slowly- but consistently - assailed by the liberal left, and the ACLU. The best known, most obvious - but least recognized as such, are the recent concepts of "Political Correctness" and codification of "Hate Crimes". It is PC not to use the dreaded "N" word. Not that anybody should use that word, but those who do now become social pariahs. Granted it is just one word... but, the loss of freedom begins with just one freedom.
"Amendment 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."The left wants to argue the semantics of this plain-English statement. They believe that a "Militia" is the military, and only the military. Let's clarify that from one English language dictionary:
"Definition of MILITIA
2: the whole body of able-bodied male citizens declared by law as being subject to call to military service" (emphasis added for clarity)
(The Government recognizes two classes of "militia" the organized militia and the unorganized militia. The organized militia is generally accepted to be the National Guard of each of the 50 U.S. states. The unorganized militia are those citizens who stand ready to protect the country in the case of an extreme emergency.)
Notice the Second Amendment's reference to "the security of a free State", not a free nation. (However, by logical extension, the 50 "free states" combine to maintain a free nation.) Anybody with any level of literacy must admit (even if it goes against their personal beliefs) that " the right of the people to keep and bear Arms" needs to further explanation. It is the RIGHT of the PEOPLE, requiring no permissions from the Government.
"Infringed" is a word the left loves to argue. I'm sorry, but the word was defined for us 500 years ago:
"Definition of INFRINGE
transitive verb
1: to encroach upon in a way that violates law or the rights of another <infringe a patent>
2 obsolete : defeat, frustrate" (emphasis added)
The Constitution is the supreme law, the basis for all laws and constraining those whom we elect to govern us. Any impediment or obstacle to the free ownership, possession and use of firearms by law abiding citizens, created by the Government is an infringement!
_____________________________________________________________________
"Amendment III
No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without
the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be
prescribed by law."
I don't believe any further explanation of this amendment is necessary.
______________________________________________________________________
"Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
We should all be aware of the assault on the Fourth Amendment, in the form of the "Patriot Act" and the "National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)" both of which infringe on each of the rights specified therein. Warrantless searches, and indefinite detention of Americans by the military, only upon "suspicion" have been authorized by these acts.
______________________________________________________________________
Amendments V thru VIII do not appear to be worth efforts of usurpation by the liberal left or the ACLU. In the interest of brevity I will not discuss those here.
_______________________________________________________________________
"Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."
A bit vague, but the implication is that we have more natural rights than those specified in the BoR.
_____________________________________________________________________
"Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
At last count, thirty three states had found it necessary to reaffirm their sovereignty to the Federal Government. They did not take such actions because they had nothing better to do at the time - they did so because they could sense the threat of tyranny emanating from the White House and Congress
_____________________________________________________________________
Our Founding Fathers gave our right to keep and bear arms the prestigious second position in our Founding Document. Amendment II does not say, or even imply, that this right is only for hunting, or competitive shooting. It does not say we can only have a musket (which was state of the gunmaker's art at the time of it's writing), ten musket balls and one powder horn. It gives us the RIGHT to own whatever arms technology is offered to the general population. One lame argument against the "military-style assault weapons", is that our founders didn't have semi-automatic weapons. They also didn't have automobiles, radio, television, cellphones, or electric anything! Should we then ban anything our Founders didn't have? The left would have us believe that the Founders had no idea that there would be technological advances - that they were ignorant of the fact that there would be technical progress beyond that which they possessed!
The Second Amendment is to protect the citizens of the United States of America against the establishment of a tyrannical, dictatorial, or purely democratic form of government. This is why our foundation is that of a Democratic REPUBLIC, as opposed to a "Democracy". The Second amendment is the keystone of the Constitution's Bill of Rights - if it falls the rest will follow shortly thereafter.
I personally have taken an Oath to, "protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America against ALL enemies foreign and domestic", three times in my life. That Oath has no expiration date. What is an "oath" you ask?
"Definition of OATH
Those who would circumvent, usurp or otherwise reduce or thwart the intent of our Founding document ARE domestic enemies. The marginalization of our rights, for any reason, is unconscionable to a free people. Defense of the Second amendment IS defense of our Constitution! Don't drink the leftist Kool-Aid - protest loudly and resist any and all attempts to modify this document. A Document which has served the PEOPLE well for 236 years!
Just my thoughts...
I don't believe any further explanation of this amendment is necessary.
______________________________________________________________________
"Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
We should all be aware of the assault on the Fourth Amendment, in the form of the "Patriot Act" and the "National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)" both of which infringe on each of the rights specified therein. Warrantless searches, and indefinite detention of Americans by the military, only upon "suspicion" have been authorized by these acts.
______________________________________________________________________
Amendments V thru VIII do not appear to be worth efforts of usurpation by the liberal left or the ACLU. In the interest of brevity I will not discuss those here.
_______________________________________________________________________
"Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."
A bit vague, but the implication is that we have more natural rights than those specified in the BoR.
_____________________________________________________________________
"Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
At last count, thirty three states had found it necessary to reaffirm their sovereignty to the Federal Government. They did not take such actions because they had nothing better to do at the time - they did so because they could sense the threat of tyranny emanating from the White House and Congress
_____________________________________________________________________
Our Founding Fathers gave our right to keep and bear arms the prestigious second position in our Founding Document. Amendment II does not say, or even imply, that this right is only for hunting, or competitive shooting. It does not say we can only have a musket (which was state of the gunmaker's art at the time of it's writing), ten musket balls and one powder horn. It gives us the RIGHT to own whatever arms technology is offered to the general population. One lame argument against the "military-style assault weapons", is that our founders didn't have semi-automatic weapons. They also didn't have automobiles, radio, television, cellphones, or electric anything! Should we then ban anything our Founders didn't have? The left would have us believe that the Founders had no idea that there would be technological advances - that they were ignorant of the fact that there would be technical progress beyond that which they possessed!
The Second Amendment is to protect the citizens of the United States of America against the establishment of a tyrannical, dictatorial, or purely democratic form of government. This is why our foundation is that of a Democratic REPUBLIC, as opposed to a "Democracy". The Second amendment is the keystone of the Constitution's Bill of Rights - if it falls the rest will follow shortly thereafter.
I personally have taken an Oath to, "protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America against ALL enemies foreign and domestic", three times in my life. That Oath has no expiration date. What is an "oath" you ask?
"Definition of OATH
1a (1) :
a solemn usually formal calling upon God or a god to witness to the
truth of what one says or to witness that one sincerely intends to do
what one says (2) : a solemn attestation of the truth or inviolability of one's words
b : something (as a promise) corroborated by an oath"
An oath is an expression of fealty, a unilateral bargain insured by one's personal honor. I understand that "honor" is considered an archaic concept in today's world. Honor is viewed as a silly anachronism - perhaps by many - but believed in, and defended by more.
Just my thoughts...
AMENDMENT II DEFENDS THE BILL OF RIGHTS...
AND THE BILL OF RIGHTS DEFENDS YOU!
No comments:
Post a Comment