An Important Point about the Second Amendment

After reading about how New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg apparently wants President Obama and Presidential candidate Mitt Romney to start committing to gun control laws, and that he apparently thinks that police across the country should go on strike to demand that more gun control laws be put in place, I feel something important needs to be pointed out. The reason why the right to own weapons is protected in the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is so that citizens have means to defend themselves from the government!

No, I do not want to see police officers getting shot. I do not want anyone to get shot. And I certainly do not advocate shooting at police officers. But let us be clear on this. The Second Amendment is not there to protect hunting. It is not there so that people can defend themselves from robbers. It is there so that people can defend themselves against the government. It is a check on tyranny, on the accumulation of power by government. Which means that Mayor Bloomberg is wrong. He complained that people are buying armor piercing rounds, and this is a danger to police who wear body armor. Yes, it is. And it should be.

I understand Bloomberg and others want to keep police officers safe from harm. So do I. I also want to keep citizens safe from harm. Disarming citizens as police departments across the country increasingly become armed like small armies preparing for war, however, is not the way to protect the people.

Let us make something else clear. It is not the job of the people to make sure the police are safe. It is the job of the police and the government to protect people’s rights. Yes, that does mean sometimes police will be put in danger. Make no mistake, what Mayor Bloomberg and those like him are asking for is to make police work easier by giving police and government more power. But as has been said many times before, police work is only easy in a police state.

2 Responses to “An Important Point about the Second Amendment”

  1. Gun control does nothing to stop crimials, it only disarms law abiding citizens. There are aleready more than 22,000 local, state and federal gun laws on the books. It is the right of every law abiding American citizen to legally own firearms for self defense.

  2. I listened to a webcast put on by a fairly organized group of citizens who have formed a large and organized citizen militia. These groups are called hate groups by the media and patriots by others. Their numbers have soared in the last four years.

    I was listening to a show one night put on by these people who sounded perfectly sane to me. They were not preaching hate; they were saying they are afraid of the growing power of our government and the loss of individual liberties. They were recommending for people to meet with their neighbors and form similar groups. In the event of any catastrophe or a government turning against its own, these people are armed and ready to protect their families and each other. They have food and water stored. Each has a job they are expected to do should things take a turn for the worse.

    They were talking about the 2nd Amendment that night. An older man from Texas took over the discussion and I learned something from him that day. He said that the purpose of the 2nd Amendment was not to guarantee citizens the right to bear arms. His opinion is that this is the interpretation the 2nd Amendment has morphed into. He then cited this line from the 2nd Amendment.

    “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.”

    His opinion is that when the framers of the constitution wrote this document, they knew all too well the perils of government grown out of control. It was common during this time for people to form militias of private citizens who armed themselves and joined together to protect each other. Neighbors looked out for neighbors, yes–but this also gave people the ability to keep government interference and policing in check. He said that all of us not only have the right to bear arms, but a duty to bear arms, and to contribute yourself and your time to your local militia. It was absolutely expected of men to do this at the time the constitution was written.

    Here is an interesting link about the history of citizen militias.

    His point was that we not only have the right to bear arms, but a duty to do so. Maybe not all of us, but at least the capable amongst us should, and should do so, without the interference of the government.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: