Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Truth About The Right To Keep And Bear Arms
Flopping Aces ^ | 12-22-12 | CJ

Posted on 12/23/2012 10:17:01 AM PST by Starman417

“I don’t think legitimate sportsmen are going to say, ‘I need an assault weapon to go hunting,’” Cuomo said, according to the New York Times. “There is a balance here — I understand the rights of gun owners; I understand the rights of hunters.”

Cuomo indicated the state will likely force some kind of permit process on owners of semi-automatic “assault weapons.” In addition to generating revenue and expanding the size and reach of government, the effort will allow the state to confiscate the weapons of citizens who do not comply.

Confiscation could be an option. Mandatory sale to the state could be an option. Permitting could be an option — keep your gun but permit it,” the governor said.

This is the mayor of one of the largest states (population-wise) in the country! We have devolved into to a point in the gun rights argument that we're reverting back to the very thing from which we sought independence. The Declaration of Independence lists several grievances that led to the Revolutionary War.

King George was an oppressive ruler. He quartered troops in private homes to keep the citizens in check. He forced sailors to take up arms against fellow countrymen. He taxed them into oblivion without any representation. He made up laws on the fly to deal with trouble makers and denied them due process.

In Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England (1803), St. George Tucker, a lawyer, Revolutionary War militia officer, legal scholar, and later a U.S. District Court judge (appointed by James Madison in 1813), wrote of the 2nd Amendment that, "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, and this without any qualification as to their condition or degree, as is the case in the British government."

Yes, I'm a nerd. I read and RESEARCH the meanings of the Constitution, especially the most fundamental and important of our rights. Delving further into the Appendix, Tucker explains further the meaning of the 2nd Amendment (emphasis is mine).

This may be considered as the true palladium of liberty .... The right of self defence is the first law of nature: in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest limits possible. Wherever standing armies are kept up, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any colour or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction. In England, the people have been disarmed, generally, under the specious pretext of preserving the game: a never failing lure to bring over the landed aristocracy to support any measure, under that mask, though calculated for very different purposes. True it is, their bill of rights seems at first view to counteract this policy: but the right of bearing arms is confined to protestants, and the words suitable to their condition and degree, have been interpreted to authorise the prohibition of keeping a gun or other engine for the destruction of game, to any farmer, or inferior tradesman, or other person not qualified to kill game. So that not one man in five hundred can keep a gun in his house without being subject to a penalty.

Sound familiar? Today's progressive movement has sought to turn the 2nd Amendment's meaning into something it isn't. Our lofty politicians - protected with their throngs of security guards, armored vehicles, and other protections - and their lapdog media have succeeded at convincing the "low information voters," as Rush Limbaugh likes to say, that this right is meant to apply to hunters only. Or in your home only.

In addition, they have tried to tell us that even if we were hunters, we "don't need those kinds of weapons for hunting." Nearly every argument I have with a progressive gun grabber usually ends incorporates the statements that there is no use for any type of magazine that can carry more than 10 rounds or to own a weapon that looks black and evil. Personally, I think that's racist that they are trying to ban so-called "black rifles."

Another constitutional scholar to our Founders, William Rawle, wrote a book in 1829 called, "A View of the Constitution of the United States of America." In this book, he talks about the reach and authority of the 2nd Amendment while also discussing the limitations on those that would attempt to circumvent it. He, rightly so, points out that the 27 words that make up the 2nd Amendment are composed of two, separate clauses; not one run-on sentence. Of the first clause (a well regulated Militia is necessary to the security of a free state), he writes:

(excerpt) Read more at floppingaces.net...


TOPICS: Gardening; Politics
KEYWORDS: 2nd; banglist; blogpimp; constitution; guncontrol; guns; secondamendment

1 posted on 12/23/2012 10:17:13 AM PST by Starman417
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Starman417
"...I understand the rights of gun owners..."

Obviously, he doesn't.

2 posted on 12/23/2012 10:25:30 AM PST by Washi (Socialism is Slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Starman417
Very true. The principal purpose of the 2d Amendment is to forestall, and if need be to overthrow, incipient tyranny. It ain't about getting venison on the table. As Judge Alex Kozinski wrote,

The prospect of tyranny may not grab the headlines the way vivid stories of gun crime routinely do. But few saw the Third Reich coming until it was too late. The Second Amendment is a doomsday provision, one designed for those exceptionally rare circumstances where all other rights have failed -- where the government refuses to stand for reelection and silences those who protest; where courts have lost the courage to oppose, or can find no one to enforce their decrees. However improbable these contingencies may seem today, facing them unprepared is a mistake a free people get to make only once.

Fortunately, the Framers were wise enough to entrench the right of the people to keep and bear arms within our constitutional structure. The purpose and importance of that right was still fresh in their minds, and they spelled it out clearly so it would not be forgotten. Despite the panel's mighty struggle to erase these words, they remain, and the people themselves can read what they say plainly enough:

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.

3 posted on 12/23/2012 10:29:25 AM PST by pogo101
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Starman417

These wackos have no intention of taking guns from CRIMINALS. All the talk is about taking them from honest, law-abiding people. They know danmed well what they are doing. Leaving guns in the hands of criminals allows them to waltz right in and take what they want from the honest people who work their a$$e$s off to pay the taxes that pay for the welfare cards of the criminals.


4 posted on 12/23/2012 10:34:17 AM PST by I want the USA back
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Starman417
Important quote in the article from Supreme Court Justice Story:

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.

The thing is, we're so far away from that. Who here favors dismantling the "standing armies" of the United States?

5 posted on 12/23/2012 10:41:31 AM PST by Behind the Blue Wall
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Behind the Blue Wall
The thing is, we're so far away from that. Who here favors dismantling the "standing armies" of the United States?

Even if the standing armies, under a tyranny, surely could win out over even an armed populace, that is no reason to allow disarming OF the populace under the notion of, "Well, what's the point nowadays?"

6 posted on 12/23/2012 10:46:03 AM PST by pogo101
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Starman417


The Founder's Intent

7 posted on 12/23/2012 10:55:36 AM PST by DocRock (All they that TAKE the sword shall perish with the sword. Matthew 26:52 Gun grabbers beware.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Starman417

All cards have not been played...yet!

I believe it is time for the states to begin writing some amendments to the constitution.

They should do this while the mid west states still have a conservative majority. With open borders it will not be long before even they are taken over.


8 posted on 12/23/2012 10:55:47 AM PST by CIB-173RDABN (California does not have a money problem, it has a spending problem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Starman417

>> Confiscation Could Be An Option. Mandatory Sale To The State Could Be An Option... <<

Sadly..the same mindset of the sheep of Australia and England who bowed to this is America’s mindset also. Yes, many would surrender their firearms one bullet at a time, with most wasting those bullets on the flunkeys who would come to take them rather than on the those who sent them, but most, to preserve their cushy lifestyle, will kneel with heads bowed.


9 posted on 12/23/2012 10:58:34 AM PST by Ed Story
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pogo101

I don’t disagree, but if one of the central arguments underlying the right to bear arms is to “repel invasions” before an army can be organized, then we’ve already long since ceded that argument by allowing the federal government to maintain standing armies in times of peace.


10 posted on 12/23/2012 11:01:49 AM PST by Behind the Blue Wall
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Starman417
A few days after the tragic Sandy Hook school murders, a young Marine in fatigues stationed himself at the front entrance of the Nashville elementary school his two children attend. Another parent heard him admit to a reporter that he was unarmed. The other parent commented that, even though the young Marine standing guard was not armed, it made him “feel better” to know he was there.

It’s often been observed that “perception is more important than reality”. The observation is often correct. It is never MORE CORRECT than for those we’ve come to call “liberals”. I prefer “statist” but “liberal” has morphed from its classic meaning to the other end of the spectrum so I’ll stay with it.

Since these folks operate almost entirely on EMOTION and FEELING, REALITY seldom allows FACTS to intrude upon the delusional worldview they have constructed and the comfort that provides them. It is that illogical, irrational and delusional mindset that prompts many of them to continue to quest after a Utopian society. The thought that such a society can and will never be achieved in a fallen world populated with failed sinners never penetrates whatever remains of their cognitive consciousness. It’s a DANGEROUS WORLD and, as the liberals continue to “define deviancy down”, it becomes more dangerous daily.

There is another, far more sinister, level of the “liberal” call for gun control.

It was Mencken who offered that “The urge to save humanity is most often a false front for the URGE TO RULE.” He clearly had been a student of the liberal politicians of his day. Were he alive today and able to observe the likes of Chuck Schumer, Diane Feinstein, Obama and the rest, he’d almost certainly have used far stronger language to frame his sage observation.

To conclude, dozens of studies reveal the FACTS concerning gun control. Those FACTS are that where firearms are widely and READILY available to law-abiding citizens, CRIME GOES DOWN! The liberals who willfully ignore the FACTUAL EVIDENCE and continue to call for gun control (i.e. the DISARMING of DECENT CITIZENS, thereby denying them the ability to exercise their God-given right to self-defense) are those about whom Mencken wrote: Their goal is NOT about preserving life. It is about the hell-bent pursuit of the impossible to achieve Utopian world where all are equal but some (that’d be THEM) are MORE equal than others (that’d be US).

There are many PRO-RTKABA videos on You Tube that your often busy lives don’t allow you to find on your own. Search there for “Gun Control”, watch them – and, more importantly – SHARE THEM with the folks in your orbit.

We’re in a fight. And losing will ultimately cost us much more than our right to our guns.

Dick Bachert 12/19/2012

11 posted on 12/23/2012 11:02:59 AM PST by Dick Bachert (An ARMED society is a POLITE society!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: I want the USA back
A few days after the tragic Sandy Hook school murders, a young Marine in fatigues stationed himself at the front entrance of the Nashville elementary school his two children attend. Another parent heard him admit to a reporter that he was unarmed. The other parent commented that, even though the young Marine standing guard was not armed, it made him “feel better” to know he was there.

It’s often been observed that “perception is more important than reality”. The observation is often correct. It is never MORE CORRECT than for those we’ve come to call “liberals”. I prefer “statist” but “liberal” has morphed from its classic meaning to the other end of the spectrum so I’ll stay with it.

Since these folks operate almost entirely on EMOTION and FEELING, REALITY seldom allows FACTS to intrude upon the delusional worldview they have constructed and the comfort that provides them. It is that illogical, irrational and delusional mindset that prompts many of them to continue to quest after a Utopian society. The thought that such a society can and will never be achieved in a fallen world populated with failed sinners never penetrates whatever remains of their cognitive consciousness. It’s a DANGEROUS WORLD and, as the liberals continue to “define deviancy down”, it becomes more dangerous daily.

There is another, far more sinister, level of the “liberal” call for gun control.

It was Mencken who offered that “The urge to save humanity is most often a false front for the URGE TO RULE.” He clearly had been a student of the liberal politicians of his day. Were he alive today and able to observe the likes of Chuck Schumer, Diane Feinstein, Obama and the rest, he’d almost certainly have used far stronger language to frame his sage observation.

To conclude, dozens of studies reveal the FACTS concerning gun control. Those FACTS are that where firearms are widely and READILY available to law-abiding citizens, CRIME GOES DOWN! The liberals who willfully ignore the FACTUAL EVIDENCE and continue to call for gun control (i.e. the DISARMING of DECENT CITIZENS, thereby denying them the ability to exercise their God-given right to self-defense) are those about whom Mencken wrote: Their goal is NOT about preserving life. It is about the hell-bent pursuit of the impossible to achieve Utopian world where all are equal but some (that’d be THEM) are MORE equal than others (that’d be US).

There are many PRO-RTKABA videos on You Tube that your often busy lives don’t allow you to find on your own. Search there for “Gun Control”, watch them – and, more importantly – SHARE THEM with the folks in your orbit.

We’re in a fight. And losing will ultimately cost us much more than our right to our guns.

Dick Bachert 12/19/2012

12 posted on 12/23/2012 11:05:49 AM PST by Dick Bachert (An ARMED society is a POLITE society!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Starman417
Cuomo indicated the state will likely force some kind of permit process on owners of semi-automatic “assault weapons.” In addition to generating revenue and expanding the size and reach of government, the effort will allow the state to confiscate the weapons of citizens who do not comply.

Cuomo indicated the state will likely force some kind of permit process on owners of “publishing and broadcasting devices.” In addition to generating revenue and expanding the size and reach of government, the effort will allow the state to confiscate the “media” of citizens who do not comply.

Cuomo indicated the state will likely force citizens to accept some kind of “provisions to billet soldiers in private homes throughout the state.” In addition to generating revenue and expanding the size and reach of government, the effort will allow the state to “confiscate the real estate” of citizens who do not comply.

Cuomo indicated the state will likely force some kind of permit process on “churches.” In addition to generating revenue and expanding the size and reach of government, the effort will allow the state to “prohibit the free religious expression” of citizens who do not comply.

13 posted on 12/23/2012 11:09:28 AM PST by Unknowing (Now is the time for all good men to come to the aid of their country.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DocRock

Nicely done!!


14 posted on 12/23/2012 11:10:04 AM PST by SFConservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Starman417

The point of the second Amendment was to ensure that a militia could be called together. Remember: the militia is just about any able bodied mentally competent adult. Therefore the right of the people [ ie: you & I ] to keep & bear arms can not be infringed if you want to maintain the capacity to assemble a militia - which comes in handy during times of increasing government tyranny or oppression. No wonder then that government shills & representatives advocate against private gun ownership. The entire Amendment spells this fact out quite clearly but the anti-second Amendment folks have distorted its meaning beyond all recognition.


15 posted on 12/23/2012 11:14:33 AM PST by Republican1795.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pogo101

where the government refuses to stand for reelection

Or maybe where the re-election was more riddled with fraud than most 3rd world dictatorships?

What was it, 19 wards in Phily w/o a single vote for Romney?
In CO, one of their major cities had more votes than adults....

Saddam and Hugo would be proud of this last election.


16 posted on 12/23/2012 11:14:40 AM PST by logic101.net (Was Orwell wrong about anything besides the date?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: DocRock

This image is fictitious. There are too many red-coats
still standing to warrant a reload.


17 posted on 12/23/2012 11:23:46 AM PST by Slambat (The right to keep and bear arms. Anything one man can carry, drive or pull.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Starman417

“Assault weapons”? What means this term, “assault weapons”?

All weapons are, in the ultimate meaning of the term, “assault weapons”. The motive behind any assault is to force the victim into submission, or failing that more limited objective, to cause the victim to be extremely disabled or dead.

The means of the assault may be as simple as a gesture or word, escalating all the way up to “extreme prejudice”, using brute force, deadly instruments or just setting up conditions in which expiration (death, for those of you from Rio Linda) is the only option for the victim.

The means of assaulting the intended target may be more or less efficient in dispatching the objective, i.e., a Thompson sub-machine gun does the job much more quickly and affects a much larger number of people at any given time when used, as compared to, say, a six-inch knife.

So either “assault weapon” is either a redundancy, or it is a meaningless term, which applies to far more than a maybe scary-looking rifle with a stock and pistol grip, with a magazine. A single-shot muzzle-loading smoothbore pistol is equally as much an “assault weapon” as an M-14 or AK-47.


18 posted on 12/23/2012 11:25:57 AM PST by alloysteel (Bronco Bama - the cowboy who whooped up and widened the stampede.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DocRock
OUTSTANDING GRAPHIC!!! THANK YOU.

A few days after the tragic Sandy Hook school murders, a young Marine in fatigues stationed himself at the front entrance of the Nashville elementary school his two children attend. Another parent heard him admit to a reporter that he was unarmed. The other parent commented that, even though the young Marine standing guard was not armed, it made him “feel better” to know he was there.

It’s often been observed that “perception is more important than reality”. The observation is often correct. It is never MORE CORRECT than for those we’ve come to call “liberals”. I prefer “statist” but “liberal” has morphed from its classic meaning to the other end of the spectrum so I’ll stay with it.

Since these folks operate almost entirely on EMOTION and FEELING, REALITY seldom allows FACTS to intrude upon the delusional worldview they have constructed and the comfort that provides them. It is that illogical, irrational and delusional mindset that prompts many of them to continue to quest after a Utopian society. The thought that such a society can and will never be achieved in a fallen world populated with failed sinners never penetrates whatever remains of their cognitive consciousness. It’s a DANGEROUS WORLD and, as the liberals continue to “define deviancy down”, it becomes more dangerous daily.

There is another, far more sinister, level of the “liberal” call for gun control.

It was Mencken who offered that “The urge to save humanity is most often a false front for the URGE TO RULE.” He clearly had been a student of the liberal politicians of his day. Were he alive today and able to observe the likes of Chuck Schumer, Diane Feinstein, Obama and the rest, he’d almost certainly have used far stronger language to frame his sage observation.

To conclude, dozens of studies reveal the FACTS concerning gun control. Those FACTS are that where firearms are widely and READILY available to law-abiding citizens, CRIME GOES DOWN! The liberals who willfully ignore the FACTUAL EVIDENCE and continue to call for gun control (i.e. the DISARMING of DECENT CITIZENS, thereby denying them the ability to exercise their God-given right to self-defense) are those about whom Mencken wrote: Their goal is NOT about preserving life. It is about the hell-bent pursuit of the impossible to achieve Utopian world where all are equal but some (that’d be THEM) are MORE equal than others (that’d be US).

There are many PRO-RTKABA videos on You Tube that your often busy lives don’t allow you to find on your own. Search there for “Gun Control”, watch them – and, more importantly – SHARE THEM with the folks in your orbit.

We’re in a fight. And losing will ultimately cost us much more than our right to our guns.

Dick Bachert 12/19/2012

19 posted on 12/23/2012 11:30:05 AM PST by Dick Bachert (An ARMED society is a POLITE society!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Behind the Blue Wall

True, but on the other hand, the invasion of illegal aliens
from Messyco still goes on unhindered by the second
amendment or even the standing army. This is a Coup d’état
and they know eventually the 2nd amendment is going to get
in their way.


20 posted on 12/23/2012 11:32:34 AM PST by Slambat (The right to keep and bear arms. Anything one man can carry, drive or pull.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Starman417
“Confiscation could be an option. Mandatory sale to the state could be an option. Permitting could be an option — keep your gun but permit it,”

This isn't for protection of the masses it's for protection FROM the masses every step is closer to the end of freedom for gun owners when they ban the sale of guns and ammo they turn the masses into criminals it's exactly what they are aiming for !

21 posted on 12/23/2012 11:36:21 AM PST by ATOMIC_PUNK (I'm not afraid to say what i mean nor should you be afraid of what you know to be true !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DocRock

Love the pic, Used it on Facebook.


22 posted on 12/23/2012 11:37:22 AM PST by jafojeffsurf (Return to the Constitution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Starman417

Federalist 46 by James Madison


23 posted on 12/23/2012 11:54:09 AM PST by Sivad (Nor Cal Red Turf)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Starman417

Fist they force you to get a permit, then, once they know where all the guns are, they confiscate.


24 posted on 12/23/2012 12:01:54 PM PST by TalBlack (Evil doesn't have a day job.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Republican1795.
The right to keep and bear arms is ANCIENT ~ it predates the settlement of Europe by Indo-European people.

This is the one that makes some men nobles and other men their serfs.

The US Constitution announced to the whole world forever that in the United States of America all men are noblemen, and are free to think, and have the right to call down the very power of the state to resolve disputes if necessary.

What was it you said this was about?

What you need to do is read the first three amendments together ~ they are a reflection of a hard won understanding by the Huguenots in The Religious Wars and later that arms are required for the purposes set forth in the First Amendment ~ your basic freedom of conscience clause ~ and that government is not empowered to pass laws regarding arms ~ and further, the government is not authorized to use the armed forces to kick around private individuals.

25 posted on 12/23/2012 12:11:49 PM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: ATOMIC_PUNK

Cuomo is just another mafia punk. He’s not married to that whore he keeps either. Said he didn’t need a permit for messin’ ‘round ~ that such things were for the little people.


26 posted on 12/23/2012 12:13:27 PM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Starman417

Up here in God`s Country, each marksman citizen has an average of 6 assault weapons, 4 shotguns, several .44`s, several 30 30`s, many .22`s and assorted blunderbusses, muskets and 1776 field cannon. Good Hunting, Gov. Coma!


27 posted on 12/23/2012 12:29:19 PM PST by bunkerhill7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Starman417
“Confiscation could be an option. Mandatory sale to the state could be an option

And there it is. You knew it was coming.

28 posted on 12/23/2012 12:43:29 PM PST by bgill (We've passed the point of no return. Welcome to Al Amerika.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Starman417

In all of these gun debates no one is speaking for the criminal! These gun control proposals are protection for criminals. Do you know the fear a crimninal faces when he break into a home to rape, steal, or pillage? It will be much safer for criminals if America is disarmed. It’s time we quit being selfish and care about the health and safety of the hoodlums amongst us. Just remember each criminal killed in the act of murder, or larceny is one less vote for the democratic party!


29 posted on 12/23/2012 12:53:01 PM PST by 2nd Amendment
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2nd Amendment

It’s time we quit being selfish and care about the health and safety of the hoodlums amongst us. Just remember each criminal killed in the act of murder
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Isn’t a criminal being killed or badly wounded while at work covered by Workmans Comp and SSD?

It definitely is a hazardous working condition at times so maybe we can redefine the shooting of a B&E guy as a ‘hostile working environment’ and compensate him as such, while protecting him/her under the harassment laws.

A ‘blue plate’ committee should be formed to look into this.

With proper handling of these ‘workers’ more people may decide to take a similar job, thereby bringing the unemployment rolls down to where the ‘party in charge’ looks better.

Maybe they can unionize thereby forming solidarity.

So many solutions, so little time...


30 posted on 12/23/2012 1:02:43 PM PST by xrmusn (6/98 "It is virtually impossible to clean the pond as long as the pigs are still crapping in it")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

Why must we defend the Right to Keep and Bear Arms?
It is NECESSARY.
It is our God-given RIGHT.
It is constitutionally REQUIRED.
“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 Second Amendment to the United States Constitution
The State Constitutions:

ALABAMA:

Article 1: Declaration of Rights

Section 26: Right to bear arms:

That every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense of himself and the state.

ALASKA:

Article 1: Declaration of Rights:

Section 19: Right to Bear Arms:

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 individual right to keep and bear arms shall not be denied or infringed by the State or a political subdivision of the State.

ARIZONA:

Article II: Declaration of Rights:

Section 26: Bearing arms:

The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of himself or the state shall not be impaired, but nothing in this section shall be construed as authorizing individuals or corporations to organize, maintain, or employ an armed body of men.

ARKANSAS:

Article II: Declaration of Rights:

Section 5: The citizens of this state shall have the right to keep and bear arms for their common defense.

CALIFORNIA:

Article I: Declaration of Rights:

Section 1: All people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable rights. Among these are enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy.

COLORADO:

Article 2: Bill of Rights:

Section 13. Right to Bear Arms:

The right of no person to keep and bear arms in defense of his home, person and property, or in aid of the civil power when thereto legally summoned, shall be called in question; but nothing herein contained shall be construed to justify the practice of carrying concealed weapons.

CONNECTICUT:

Article First: Declaration of Rights: That the great and essential principles of liberty and free government may be recognized and established, WE DECLARE:

Section 15: Every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense of himself and the state.

DELAWARE:

Article 1: Bill of Rights:

Section 20: A person has the right to keep and bear arms for the defense of self, family, home and state, and for hunting and recreational use.

FLORIDA:

Article 1: Declaration of Rights

Section 8: Right to Bear Arms:

(a) The right of the people to keep and bear arms in defense of themselves and of the lawful authority of the state shall not be infringed, except that the manner of bearing arms may be regulated by law.

(b) There shall be a mandatory period of three days, excluding weekends and legal holidays, between the purchase and delivery at retail of any handgun. For the purposes of this section, “purchase” means the transfer of money or other valuable consideration to the retailer, and “handgun” means a firearm capable of being carried and used by one hand, such as a pistol or revolver. Holders of a concealed weapon permit as prescribed in Florida law shall not be subject to the provisions of this paragraph.

(c) The legislature shall enact legislation implementing subsection (b) of this section, effective no later than December 31, 1991, which shall provide that anyone violating the provisions of subsection (b) shall be guilty of a felony.

(d) This restriction shall not apply to a trade in of another handgun.

GEORGIA:

Article I: Bill of Rights:

Section I: Rights of Persons:

Paragraph VIII: Arms, right to keep and bear:

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, but the General Assembly shall have power to prescribe the manner in which arms may be borne.

HAWAII:

Article 1: Bill of Rights:

Section 17: Right To Bear Arms:

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.

IDAHO:

Article 1: Declaration of Rights:

Section 1: Inalienable Rights Of Man:

All men are by nature free and equal, and have certain inalienable rights, among which are enjoying and defending life and liberty; acquiring, possessing and protecting property; pursuing happiness and securing safety.

Section 11: Right To Keep And Bear Arms:

The people have the right to keep and bear arms, which right shall not be abridged; but this provision shall not prevent the passage of laws to govern the carrying of weapons concealed on the person nor prevent passage of legislation providing minimum sentences for crimes committed while in possession of a firearm, nor prevent the passage of legislation providing penalties for the possession of firearms by a convicted felon, nor prevent the passage of any legislation punishing the use of a firearm. No law shall impose licensure, registration or special taxation on the ownership or possession of firearms or ammunition. Nor shall any law permit the confiscation of firearms, except those actually used in the commission of a felony.

ILLINOIS:

Article 1: Bill of Rights:

Section 22: Right to Arms:

Subject only to the police power, the right of the individual citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

INDIANA:

Article I: Bill of Rights:

Section 32: Bearing Arms:

The people shall have a right to bear arms, for the defense of themselves and the State.

IOWA:

Article I: Bill of Rights:

Section 1:Rights of persons: All men are, by nature, free and equal, and have certain inalienable rights - among which are those of enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining safety and happiness.

Article 6: Militia:

Section 1: Composition — training:

The militia of this state shall be composed of all able-bodied male citizens, between the ages of eighteen and forty-five years, except such as are or may hereafter be exempt by the laws of the United States, or of this state, and shall be armed, equipped, and trained, as the general assembly may provide by law.

KANSAS:

Kansas Bill of Rights:

Section 4: Bear arms; armies.

The people have the right to bear arms for their defense and security; but standing armies, in time of peace, are dangerous to liberty, and shall not be tolerated, and the military shall be in strict subordination to the civil power.

Article 8: Militia

Section 1: Composition; exemption. The militia shall be composed of all able-bodied male citizens between the ages of twenty-one and forty-five years, except such as are exempted by the laws of the United States or of this state; but all citizens of any religious denomination whatever who from scruples of conscience may be adverse to bearing arms shall be exempted therefrom, upon such conditions as may be prescribed by law.

KENTUCKY:

Bill of Rights:

All men are, by nature, free and equal, and have certain inherent and inalienable rights, among which may be reckoned:

First: The right of enjoying and defending their lives and liberties.

Fifth: The right of acquiring and protecting property.

Seventh: The right to bear arms in defense of themselves and of the State, subject to the power of the General Assembly to enact laws to prevent persons from carrying concealed weapons.

LOUISIANA:

Article 1: Declaration of Rights:

Section 11: Right to Keep and Bear Arms:

The right of each citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be abridged, but this provision shall not prevent the passage of laws to prohibit the carrying of weapons concealed on the person.

MAINE:

Article I: Declaration of Rights:

Section 1: Natural rights:

All people are born equally free and independent, and have certain natural, inherent and unalienable rights, among which are those of enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing and protecting property, and of pursuing and obtaining safety and happiness.

Section 16: To keep and bear arms:

Every citizen has a right to keep and bear arms and this right shall never be questioned.

MARYLAND:

Declaration of Rights

Article 2:

The Constitution of the United States, and the Laws made, or which shall be made, in pursuance thereof, and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, are, and shall be the Supreme Law of the State; and the Judges of this State, and all the People of this

State, are, and shall be bound thereby; anything in the Constitution or Law of this State to the contrary notwithstanding.

Article 28:

That a well regulated Militia is the proper and natural defense of a free Government.

MASSACHUSETTS:

1780
Part the First: A Declaration of the Rights of the Inhabitants of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts:

Article I:

All people are born free and equal and have certain natural, essential and unalienable rights; among which may be reckoned the right of enjoying and defending their lives and liberties; that of acquiring, possessing and protecting property; in fine, that of seeking and obtaining their safety and happiness.

Annulled and replaced:

Article CVI. Article I of Part the First of the Constitution is hereby annulled and the following is adopted:-

All people are born free and equal and have certain natural, essential and unalienable rights; among which may be reckoned the right of enjoying and defending their lives and liberties; that of acquiring, possessing and protecting property; in fine, that of seeking and obtaining their safety and happiness. Equality under the law shall not be denied or abridged because of sex, race, color, creed or national origin.

Article XVII:

The people have a right to keep and to bear arms for the common defense. And as, in time of peace, armies are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be maintained without the consent of the legislature; and the military power shall always be held in an exact subordination to the civil authority, and be governed by it.

NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS (1780):

decided that the general Massachusetts declaration did not state the right with sufficient clarity and openness, and passed the following resolve: “The people have a right to keep and bear arms as well for their own as the common defense.”

WILLIAMSBURG, MASSACHUSETTS (1780):

decided that the general Massachusetts declaration was not sufficiently strong, and voted to include their own resolve: “That the people have a right to keep and bear Arms for their own and the Common defense.” Further voting on the reason: “...we esteem it an essential privilege to keep Arms in our houses for our own defense and while we continue honest and lawful subjects of government we ought never to be deprived of them.” The town deemed it necessary to explicitly protect the right in order to prevent the possibility: “That the legislature in some future period may confine all the firearms to some public magazine and thereby deprive the people of the use of them.”

MICHIGAN:

Article 1: Declaration of Rights:

Section 6: Bearing of arms:

Every person has a right to keep and bear arms for the defense of himself and the state.

MINNESOTA:

No reference in the present Constitution.

MISSISSIPPI:

Article III: Bill of Rights:

Section 12: The right of every citizen to keep and bear arms in defense of his home, person, or property, or in aid of the civil power when thereto legally summoned, shall not be called in question, but the legislature may regulate or forbid carrying concealed weapons.

MISSOURI:

Article I: Bill of Rights:

Section 23: Right to keep and bear arms — exception:

That the right of every citizen to keep and bear arms in defense of his home, person and property, or when lawfully summoned in aid of the civil power, shall not be questioned; but this shall not justify the wearing of concealed weapons.

MONTANA:

Article 2: Declaration of Rights:

Section 3. Inalienable rights:

All persons are born free and have certain inalienable rights. They include the right to a clean and healthful environment and the rights of pursuing life’s basic necessities, enjoying and defending their lives and liberties, acquiring, possessing and protecting property, and seeking their safety, health and happiness in all lawful ways. In enjoying these rights, all persons recognize corresponding responsibilities.

Article 2: Declaration of Rights:

Section 12: Right to bear arms:

The right of any person to keep or bear arms in defense of his own home, person, and property, or in aid of the civil power when thereto legally summoned, shall not be called in question, but nothing herein contained shall be held to permit the carrying of concealed weapons.

NEBRASKA:

Article I: Statement of rights:

CI-1 All persons are by nature free and independent, and have certain inherent and inalienable rights; among these are life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and the right to keep and bear arms for security or defense of self, family, home, and others, and for lawful common defense, hunting, recreational use, and all other lawful purposes, and such rights shall not be denied or infringed by the state or any subdivision thereof. To secure these rights, and the protection of property, governments are instituted among people, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.

NEVADA:

Article 1:

Section 1: All men are by Nature free and equal and have certain inalienable rights among which are those of enjoying and defending life and liberty; Acquiring, Possessing and Protecting property and pursuing and obtaining safety and happiness.

Section 11: Right to keep and bear arms; civil power supreme:

1. Every citizen has the right to keep and bear arms for security and defense, for lawful hunting and recreational use and for other lawful purposes.

2. The military shall be subordinate to the civil power; No standing army shall be maintained by this State in time of peace, and in time of War, no appropriation for a standing army shall be for a longer time than two years.

NEW HAMPSHIRE:

In ratifying the new U.S. Constitution, proposed adding a Bill of Rights which would include the following clause: “Congress shall never disarm any citizen unless such as are or have been in actual rebellion.”

Part First: Bill of Rights:

Article 2-a: The Bearing of Arms:

All persons have the right to keep and bear arms in defense of themselves, their families, their property and the state.

NEW JERSEY:

Article I: Rights and Privileges:

Section 1: All persons are by nature free and independent, and have certain natural and unalienable rights, among which are those of enjoying and defending life and liberty, of acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and of pursuing and obtaining safety and happiness.

NEW MEXICO:

Article II: Bill of Rights:

Section 6: Right to bear arms:

No law shall abridge the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms for security and defense, for lawful hunting and recreational use and for other lawful purposes, but nothing herein shall be held to permit the carrying of concealed weapons. No municipality or county shall regulate, in any way, an incident of the right to keep and bear arms.

NEW YORK:

Conditioned its ratification of the new U.S. Constitution on adoption of the following: “That the people have a right to keep and bear arms; that a well regulated militia, including the body of the people capable of bearing arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state.”

The New York Constitution of 1777 contained no Bill of Rights, but its framers insisted that the federal Constitution include such provisions. In addition, the members of the constitutional convention in New York “were obliged to go armed, so as to protect themselves from stray marauding parties ....”.

No reference in the present Constitution.

NORTH CAROLINA:

Article I: Declaration of Rights:

Section 30: Militia and the right to bear arms:

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; and, as standing armies in time of peace are dangerous to liberty. they shall not be maintained, and the military shall be kept under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power. Nothing herein shall justify the practice of carrying concealed weapons, or prevent the General Assembly from enacting penal statutes against that practice.

NORTH DAKOTA:

Article I: Declaration of Rights:

Section 1: All men are by nature equally free and independent and have certain inalienable rights, among which are those enjoying and defending life and liberty; acquiring, possessing and protecting property and reputation; and pursuing and obtaining safety and happiness; and to keep and bear arms for the defense of their person, family, property, and the state, and for lawful hunting, recreational, and other lawful purposes, which shall not be infringed.

Article 11: General Provisions:

Section 16. The militia of this state shall consist of all able-bodied male persons residing in the state, between the ages of eighteen and forty-five years, except such as may be exempted by the laws of the United States or of this state. Persons whose religious tenets or conscientious scruples forbid them to bear arms shall not be compelled to do so in times of peace, but shall pay an equivalent for a personal service.

OHIO:

Article 1: Bill of Rights:

Section 1.04: Bearing arms; standing armies; military powers:

The people have the right to bear arms for their defense and security; but standing armies, in time of peace, are dangerous to liberty, and shall not be kept up; and the military shall be in strict subordination to the civil power.

OKLAHOMA:

Article 2: Bill of Rights:

Section 26: Bearing arms — Carrying weapons:

The right of a citizen to keep and bear arms in defense of his home, person, or property, or in aid of the civil power, when thereunto legally summoned, shall never be prohibited; but nothing herein contained shall prevent the Legislature from regulating the carrying of weapons.

OREGON:

Article I: Bill of Rights:

Section 27: Right to bear arms; military subordinate to civil power.

The people shall have the right to bear arms for the defense of themselves, and the State, but the Military shall be kept in strict subordination to the civil power.

PENNSYLVANIA:

1776

“That the people have a right to bear arms for the defense of themselves and the state; and as standing armies in the time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up...”

1790

“That the right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the state shall not be questioned.”

Present Constitution

Article 1: Declaration Of Rights:

Section 1: Inherent Rights of Mankind:

All men are born equally free and independent, and have certain inherent and indefeasible rights, among which are those of enjoying and defending life and liberty, of acquiring, possessing and protecting property and reputation, and of pursuing their own happiness.

Section 21: Right to Bear Arms:

The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State shall not be questioned.

RHODE ISLAND:

Article 1: Declaration Of Certain Constitutional Rights And Principles:

Section 22: Right to bear arms:

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

SOUTH CAROLINA:

Article 1: Declaration of Rights:

Section 20: Right to keep and bear arms; armies; military power subordinate to civil authority; how soldiers quartered:

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. As, in times of peace, armies are dangerous to liberty, they shall not be maintained without the consent of the General Assembly. The military power of the State shall always be held in subordination to the civil authority and be governed by it. 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 the manner prescribed by law.

SOUTH DAKOTA:

Article 6: Bill of Rights:

Section 24: Right to bear arms:

The right of citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the state shall not be denied.

TENNESSEE:

Article 1: Declaration of Rights:

Section 24: That the sure and certain defense of a free people, is a well regulated militia; and, as standing armies in time of peace are dangerous to freedom, they ought to be avoided as far as the circumstances and safety of the community will admit; and that in all cases the military shall be kept in strict subordination to the civil authority.

TEXAS:

Article 1: Bill of Rights:

Section 23: Right to Keep and Bear Arms:

Every citizen shall have the right to keep and bear arms in the lawful defense of himself or the State; but the Legislature shall have power, by law, to regulate the wearing of arms, with a view to prevent crime.

UTAH:

Article I: Declaration of Rights:

Section 6: Right to bear arms:

The individual right of the people to keep and bear arms for security and defense of self, family, others, property, or the state, as well as for other lawful purposes shall not be infringed; but nothing herein shall prevent the legislature from defining the lawful use of arms.

VERMONT:

1777

Article 1:

That all persons are born equally free and independent, and have certain natural, inherent, and unalienable rights, amongst which are the enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety; therefore no person born in this country, or brought from over sea, ought to be holden by law, to serve any person as a servant, slave or apprentice, after arriving to the age of twenty-one years, unless bound by the person’s own consent, after arriving to such age, or bound by law for the payment of debts, damages, fines, costs, or the like.

Present Constitution

Chapter I. A Declaration of the Rights of the Inhabitants of the State of Vermont

Article 16th: Right to bear arms; standing armies; military power subordinate to civil:

That the people have a right to bear arms for the defense of themselves and the State — and as standing armies in time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up; and that the military should be kept under strict subordination to and governed by the civil power.

VIRGINIA:

1776

Article 1, Section 13. Militia; standing armies; military subordinate to civil power.

That a well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state, therefore, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty; and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.

Present Constitution

Article 1: Bill of Rights:

Section 13. Militia; standing armies; military subordinate to civil power:

That a well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state, therefore, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty; and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.

WASHINGTON:

Article I: Declaration of Rights:

Section 24: Right to Bear Arms:

The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of himself, or the state, shall not be impaired, but nothing in this section shall be construed as authorizing individuals or corporations to organize, maintain or employ an armed body of men.

WEST VIRGINIA:

Article 3: Bill of Rights:

Section Con.3-22: Right to Keep and Bear Arms:

A person has the right to keep and bear arms for the defense of self, family, home and state, and for lawful hunting and recreational use.

WISCONSIN:

Article I: Declaration of Rights:

Section25: Right to Keep and Bear Arms:

The people have the right to keep and bear arms for security, defense, hunting, recreation or any other lawful purpose.

WYOMING:

Article I: Declaration of Rights:

Section:97-1-024: The right of citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and of the state shall not be denied.

http://www.minutemanrkba.com/why-rkba.html


31 posted on 12/23/2012 1:17:30 PM PST by EternalVigilance ("Give 'em Watts, boys!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Starman417

“I don’t think legitimate sportsmen are going to say, ‘I need an assault weapon to go hunting,’” Cuomo said, according to the New York Time

The Second Amendment is not about hunting Mr Cuomo. Its about you.


32 posted on 12/23/2012 1:44:11 PM PST by SECURE AMERICA (Where can I sign up for the New American Revolution and the Crusades 2012?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Starman417

When you have to buy a permit, you are simply being taxed. It figures that somebody will come up with these kinds of things. The concept of what they call gun control will be no more than simply more control over guns and will have no affect on someone using guns like this kook did. Guaranteed that what they come up with will cost people money. It will do nothing else but tax them.


33 posted on 12/23/2012 3:35:54 PM PST by maxwellsmart_agent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

What I wrote is totally consistent with what you wrote - just an added dimension.


34 posted on 12/26/2012 10:42:47 PM PST by Republican1795.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Starman417
That's a very good article, and I've saved it in my bookmarks.

BTW, I'm glad the author corrected "mayor" to "governor". There is one more area for correction, I believe.

The modern-day Democrat party talks more about the need to change the Constitution – and specifically the need to change the 2nd Amendment – than they talk about defending and supporting it. Without studying the words of those actually present during the 1880s to 1890s, they deign to just make up stuff and simply define that sacred document as “living” and “breathing.”

I believe the time frame meant is in the late 1700s, not the late 1800s.

FRegards,
LH

35 posted on 12/26/2012 11:11:24 PM PST by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson