Is The Second Amendment About Self Defense And Hunting Or Amelioration of Tyranny?
BY Herschel Smith
10 years, 4 months ago
Self defense against criminals or self defense against — criminals? Kurt Hofmann asks the question:
But as a practical matter, does that really make much difference? When you defend yourself against an assailant who happens to be a common criminal, after all, you’re defending your rights from violation, no less than if your attacker–and aspiring rights violator–draws a government paycheck, carries a tax revenue-supplied firearm, and is acting on government orders. Likewise, in resisting a tyrannical government, you are defending yourself from that government–and the hired muscle of said government, from whom you are defending yourself, is no less criminal than the common street thug or rapist.
To claim a difference, other than one of scale, between a thug who rapes a woman, and a tyrant who rapes a nation, is to elevate the tyrant to something greater than the thug-writ-large he is.
Great point. Consider for a moment gun control in Nazi Germany and what it did to the Jews. It matters little (or not at all) whether the home invader is uniformed or not. We must all ponder these difficult things.
Remember when you do ponder that we’re not the first to do so. Dietrich Bonhoeffer decided – albeit a little late to the game – that he had to speak and act. “Silence in the face of evil is itself evil: God will not hold us guiltless. Not to speak is to speak. Not to act is to act.” I claim that God has very specific requirements of us when we act.
So as to the question, the answer is not “either-or.” It is “both-and.”
On July 12, 2014 at 12:19 pm, Kansas Bright said:
“Is The Second Amendment About Self Defense And Hunting Or Amelioration of Tyranny?”
The second Amendment is pretty self explanatory: “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”
Some keywords here are “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State”. Notice that it says that a well regulated (meaning trained) Militia is necessary to secure our freedom. The it follows up with “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed”. That is stated because the Militia of the several states are “We the People”.
Richard Henry Lee: “A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves …”
George Mason, Co-author of the Second Amendment: “I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people except for a few public officials. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them.”
Samuel Adams: “It is always dangerous to the liberties of the people to have an army stationed among them, over which they have no control … The Militia is composed of free Citizens. There is therefore no danger of their making use of their Power to the destruction of their own Rights, or suffering others to invade them..”
Patrick Henry: “If you have given up your militia, and Congress shall refuse to arm them, you have lost every thing. Your existence will be precarious, because you depend on others, whose interests are not affected by your infelicity.”
Justice Story, Associate Justice, Supreme Court wrote: “The next amendment is: “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 importance of this article will scarcely be doubted by any persons, who have duly reflected upon the subject. The militia is the natural defence of a free country against sudden foreign invasions, domestic insurrections, and domestic usurpations of power by rulers. It is against sound policy for a free people to keep up large military establishments and standing armies in time of peace, both from the enormous expenses, with which they are attended, and the
facile means, which they afford to ambitious and unprincipled rulers, to subvert the government, or trample upon the rights of the people. The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will
generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them”.
Tench Coxe: “Who are the militia? are they not ourselves. Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an
American…The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.”
Hamilton, Federalist 28: “there exists a right of self-defense against a tyrannical government, and it includes the people with their own arms”
Joseph Stalin, in 1933 said: ”The United States should get rid of its militias”. And those who served within our governments did exactly that. They started governmental professional law enforcement agencies, and started calling military organizations “militias”. The LE’s (police – federal and state) are patterned after Englands, the nation we decalred our freedom from and established a LIMITED government the exact opposite of theirs. Plus we established that ALL people were created equal (yes, there were some problems, but they were working out and the framers had hopes that as more people recognized individual freedom and equality the MORE free and equal ALL would be) instead of class systems where only a few were allowed to own property, etc.
James Madison: “… large and permanent military establishments … are forbidden by the
principles of free government, and against the necessity of which the militia were meant to be a constitutional bulwark.”
The Basics of “Who” (are the Militia): All able-bodied Americans plus those lawfully allowed to be here – excluding “public servants” – from age 18 through age 60 are the Militia of the several states. The Militia equals “We the People of the USA” because each state’s Militia is made of its lawful citizens excluding “representatives”, and the state’s can work together as needed for defense and to enforce the US Constitution or each state’s Constitution.
The people and the Militia existed here in the USA before the states were created, and definitely before the US Constitution was written creating the federal government. It created,
defined, and assigned the duties that were to be carried out by those who serve within each branch of the federal government. instead of each separate state doing repetitive duties and alliances with foreign states (and to see that the states traded fairly with each other).
Each state’s Militia is made up of “We the People” protecting our own interests, homes, states, nation, and enforcing our governments. The Militia has as its constitutionally assigned duties to:
– Enforce the US Constitution and each state’s Constitution,
– Enforce and keep the “Laws of the Union” (which is constitutional laws ONLY),
– Protect the country against all enemies both domestic and foreign, and
– “to suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions”.
The US Constitution guarantees to each state its own “Republican form of government”. It
is every state’s Militia that is the ONLY Constitutionally assigned force to “counter Invasions”
and “Domestic Violence” within our nation.
Here is the Constitutional mandates to the people of the USA to keep armed and train to defend our nation against foreign and domestic enemies.
Joel Barlow, Revolutionary War veteran, wrote “Advice to the Privileged Orders, in the Several States of Europe”, clergyman, theologian, popular poet, successful diplomat, and American whose political writings were debated on the floor of Parliament said of the US Constitution:
“… not only permitting every man to arm, but obliging him to arm.”
US Constitution, Article I, Section. 8, Clause 11: “To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water”.
The congress has the duty to grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal when they are needed to enforce the US Constitution, the laws, or defend the people and the nation. This is using private citizens in their own privately owned crafts to defend the USA and her people, this is using the Militia.
Rep. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts, floor debate over the 2nd Amendment, I Annals of Congress: “What, Sir, is the use of a militia? It is to PREVENT THE ESTABLISMENT OF A
STANDING ARMY, the bane of liberty….”
Clause 15: “To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel invasions. ”
This clause is very straightforward also. The militia of each state is taxed with the defense of the USA and her people, not just with the defense of their state; and they are to be armed with weapons that can repel any invasions bearing modern weapons of war. Congress is
required to provide those military grade weapons for the militias in Clause 16.
Clause 16: “To provide for organizing, ARMING, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving
to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress”.
Thomas Jefferson, 1st inaugural, explained that: “a well-disciplined militia” is “our best reliance in peace and for the first moments of war, till regulars may relieve them” and also a guarantee of “the supremacy of the civil over the military authority; [and] economy in the public expense.”
Edwin Vieira: “The Militia of the several states offers everyone the greatest degree of equality with each other;
– BecauseEVERY able-bodied person from the age of 16 – 60 is the militia of each state.
– They, when trained, have the governmental powers to operate in every county, city, state, and throughout America when needed.
– Plus through uniformity; the Militia requires the same general duty of service from everyone – though not all will have the same tasks as they can perform different tasks according to their abilities.
This is why the Militia offers the best protection against rogue politicians and usurpation’s for those serving within the governments, “We the people” protect our own natural rights and
hold accountable those we put into positions of power by enforcing the US Constitution and each state’s constitution. When everyone takes a part in guarding the security of the neighborhood, county, city, state that they live in; plus the country when needed, it basically stops or makes it very difficult for a small body of people to take over this nation.” Edward Vieira, Junior “Constitutional Homeland Security” Volume 1, the Nation in Arms”.
Cockrum v. State: “The right of a citizen to bear arms, in lawful defense of himself or the State, is absolute. He does not derive it from the State government. It is one of the high powers delegated directly to the citizen, and is excepted out of the general powers of government. A law cannot be passed to infringe upon or impair it, because it is above the law, and independent of the lawmaking power”.
Bliss v. Commonwealth: “Arms restrictions – even concealed weapons bans – are unconstitutional, since arms bearing is an individual right and the legislature may not restrict any aspect of such a right.”
Nunn vs. State:’The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.’ The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, and not such merely as are used by the militia, shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in upon, in the smallest degree; and all this for the
important end to be attained: the rearing up and qualifying a well-regulated militia, so vitally necessary to the security of a free State.
Our opinion is that any law, State or Federal, is repugnant to the Constitution, and void, which contravenes this right”.
Black’s Law Dictionary, 3rd Edition, Militia: The body of citizens in a state, enrolled for discipline as a military force, but not engaged in actual service except in emergencies, as distinguished from regular troops or a standing army.
U.S. Constitution: NO PERSON shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
James Madison: “An efficient militia is authorized and contemplated by the Constitution
and required by the spirit and safety of free government.”
State Gazette (Charleston): No free government was ever founded or ever preserved its liberty, without uniting the characters of the citizen and soldier in those destined for the defense of the state…. Such are a well regulated militia, composed of the freeholders,
citizen and husbandman, who take up arms to preserve their property, as individuals, and their rights as freemen.
As Dr Edwin Vieira states in his book “Constitutional “Homeland Security” Volume 1: the Nation in Arms”: “That means “that NONE of those tasks are assigned to the Army, to a Navy, to a (constitutionally unknown) National Guard, or least of all to any unnamed professional police, security, or intelligence agencies of the General Government or of any state or locality. Rather, the Constitution’s explicit emphasis on the Militia as the preeminent
forces by politicians of a garrison, “national-security”, or police state…
So those bound by Oath who “knowingly, with willful blindness, or in reckless disregard of the consequences of his/her action” votes for an unconstitutional act, bill, etc; when a “President or state governor refuses to veto it and instead executes it; or when a Judge, either of the supreme and inferior courts of the general government, or of any state knowingly declares such a statute valid and enforceable – each and every one of them violates his oath of office….
“A remedy MUST exist for every individual harmed by each and every violation. That remedy MUST impose some personal liability on the violator – it being his own Oath or Affirmation he himself forswore. And that personal liability cannot be evaded by his or his cronies’
assertion of some ersatz official immunity”. Dr Edwin Vieira
“Remember that the US Constitution allows for ONLY one official immunity (ONE!). Using an “”implied power to create “official immunities” for themselves would allow them to negate the
express requirement that “they shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution”… “for any public official to create or assert a purported “official immunity’ for himself or any other official” is itself a violation of his Oath or Affirmation”. Dr. Edwin Vieira.
There is no statute of limitations on any act that breaks the Oath or Affirmation, or goes against the US Constitution, more importantly every unlawful deed that continues to remain on the books and is not destroyed by those reps who are later elected make them equally guilty of those crimes.
Hope this helps decide that question.
On July 14, 2014 at 7:25 pm, MrApple said:
The 2nd Amendment is about having the most efficient means of self-defense available, from either an attacking thug or a tyrannical overstepping Government. Hunting at the time in which the 2nd Amendment was written was simply a way of life, a means of putting food on the table. I seriously doubt the Founding Fathers were closest PETA members and even considered curbing, in any meaningful way, the practice of hunting.