gee...I think it's "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." part of it.
but maybe my grasp of the English language, grammar, and history are lacking in the Orwellian world we find ourselves in. I guess I'm in good company if some judges agree with me.
Following is the defiance I sent to the Editor, (They welcome feedback, btw) -
"Proposed gun bill won’t infringe on rights" By Thomas S. Markham
"I defy anyone to “read” into the Amendment that a citizen has the right to carry arms, except to show up as a member of a “well regulated militia.”"
Here you go Thomas, and these from another Thomas;
"The people cannot be all, & always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions it is a lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. We have had 13. states independent 11. years. There has been one rebellion. That comes to one rebellion in a century & a half for each state. What country before ever existed a century & half without a rebellion? & what country can preserve it's liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon & pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. It is it's natural manure. Our Convention has been too much impressed by the insurrection of Massachusetts: and in the spur of the moment they are setting up a kite to keep the hen-yard in order. I hope in God this article will be rectified before the new constitution is accepted."
- Thomas Jefferson, Nov. 13, 1787 letter to William S. Smith.
"Knowing of the war when she left Jamaica, & that our coast was lined with small French privateers, she armed for her defence, & took one of those commissions usually called letters of marque. She arrived here safely without having had any rencounter of any sort. Can it be necessary to say that a merchant vessel is not a privateer? That tho' she has arms to defend herself in time of war, in the course of her regular commerce, this no more makes her a privateer, than a husbandman following his plough, in time of war, with a knife or pistol in his pocket, is thereby made a soldier? The occupation of a privateer is attack and plunder, that of a merchant-vessel is commerce & self-preservation."
- Thomas Jefferson to Gouverneur Morris, 08/16/1793 [The Works of Thomas Jefferson in Twelve Volumes, Federal Edition. Collected and Edited by Paul Leicester Ford].
"I learn with great concern that [one] portion of our frontier so interesting, so important, and so exposed, should be so entirely unprovided with common fire-arms. I did not suppose any part of the United States so destitute of what is considered as among the first necessaries of a farm-house."
- Thomas Jefferson, letter to Jacob J. Brown, 1808. ME 11:432.
Believe the above is pretty much "Self-Evident", as Mr. Jefferson was known to have stated.
The U.S. Senate seems to disagree with your opinion;
Journal of the Senate of the United States of America,
WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 9, 1789.
“...On motion to amend article the fifth, by inserting these words, 'for the common defence,' next to the words 'bear arms:'
“It passed in the negative." ...
So does Mr. Madison, (the main author of the Bill of Rights);
"Mr. MADISON thought the regulation of the militia naturally appertaining to the authority charged with the public defence...."
- August 18. (1787), The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution [Elliot's Debates, Vol. 5]
The Preamble to the Bill of Rights declares it as well;
The Conventions of a number of the States having, at the time of adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to PREVENT misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further DECLARATORY and RESTRICTIVE clauses should be added, and as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government will BEST INSURE the beneficent ends of its institution;
Resolved, by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, two-thirds of both Houses concurring, that the following articles be proposed to the Legislatures of the several States, as amendments to the Constitution of the United States; all or any of which articles, when ratified by three-fourths of the said Legislatures, to be VALID TO ALL intents and purposes as part of the said Constitution, namely:
...Amendment II
DECLARATORY; (Common Defense)
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state,
RESTRICTIVE; (Self-Defense/Preservation, The First Law of Nature).
"the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
And, there is substantial further proofs if needed. The right and duty of Self-Preservation is a Pre-existent Natural Right. And, Self-Preservation is the First Law of Nature. Our Declaration and Constitution are BASED on "the TRANCENDENT laws of Nature and of Natures God". (See Federalist #43, James Madison).
Thanks SA (I think!?), it was fun! Always love to pop balloon-heads. Have my doubts that the news source will print it. But I've been surprised before.
Thank David C. for pointing out this pointy little-head for us!
Just in case anyone still doesn't know what The Second Amendment really means, here is the original text:
"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."
Then, going to the dictionary and using the definitions of the words as they were used in speech at the time the Bill of Rights was written, here is my illumination of The Second Amendment:
"Because a very effective, armed, population is essential in order for America to stay free and safe, the absolute right of everyone to own and to carry any type of weapon they choose, in any way they wish, anywhere they see fit, cannot be regulated, licensed, or even questioned in the smallest way!"
That being said, you must remember that the Bill of Rights does not "give us" any rights. It merely prohibits the government from interfering with the rights of "the people". The Bill of Rights does not apply in any way to anyone except for government, and there it is just a list of things the government is not allowed to do. It was widely recognized that rights pre-existed government, and did not come from government. It is government's only responsibility to protect the rights of the people; never to attempt to regulate or to ration those rights.
Mine feels inadequate after reading e.david's letter.
gee...I think it's "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." part of it.
ReplyDeletebut maybe my grasp of the English language, grammar, and history are lacking in the Orwellian world we find ourselves in. I guess I'm in good company if some judges agree with me.
I guess my problem is that I categorically reject his Orwellian "Newspeak".
ReplyDeleteI don't even care if he refuses to accept the truth. I just want to see if he has 'nads enough to try to take my guns!
Following is the defiance I sent to the Editor, (They welcome feedback, btw) -
ReplyDelete"Proposed gun bill won’t infringe on rights" By Thomas S. Markham
"I defy anyone to “read” into the Amendment that a citizen has the right to carry arms, except to show up as a member of a “well regulated militia.”"
Here you go Thomas, and these from another Thomas;
"The people cannot be all, & always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions it is a lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. We have had 13. states independent 11. years. There has been one rebellion. That comes to one rebellion in a century & a half for each state. What country before ever existed a century & half without a rebellion? & what country can preserve it's liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon & pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. It is it's natural manure. Our Convention has been too much impressed by the insurrection of Massachusetts: and in the spur of the moment they are setting up a kite to keep the hen-yard in order. I hope in God this article will be rectified before the new constitution is accepted."
- Thomas Jefferson, Nov. 13, 1787 letter to William S. Smith.
"Knowing of the war when she left Jamaica, & that our coast was lined with small French privateers, she armed for her defence, & took one of those commissions usually called letters of marque. She arrived here safely without having had any rencounter
of any sort. Can it be necessary to say that a merchant vessel is not a privateer? That tho' she has arms to defend herself in time of war, in the course of her regular commerce, this no more makes her a privateer, than a husbandman following his plough, in time of war, with a knife or pistol in his pocket, is thereby made a soldier? The occupation of a privateer is attack and plunder, that of a merchant-vessel is commerce & self-preservation."
- Thomas Jefferson to Gouverneur Morris, 08/16/1793 [The Works of Thomas Jefferson in Twelve Volumes, Federal Edition. Collected and Edited by Paul Leicester Ford].
"I learn with great concern that [one] portion of our frontier so interesting, so important, and so exposed, should be so entirely unprovided with common fire-arms. I did not suppose any part of the United States so destitute of what is considered as among the first necessaries of a farm-house."
- Thomas Jefferson, letter to Jacob J. Brown, 1808. ME 11:432.
Believe the above is pretty much "Self-Evident", as Mr. Jefferson was known to have stated.
The U.S. Senate seems to disagree with your opinion;
Journal of the Senate of the United States of America,
WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 9, 1789.
“...On motion to amend article the fifth, by inserting these words, 'for the common defence,' next to the words 'bear arms:'
“It passed in the negative." ...
So does Mr. Madison, (the main author of the Bill of Rights);
"Mr. MADISON thought the regulation of the militia naturally appertaining to the authority charged with the public defence...."
- August 18. (1787), The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution [Elliot's Debates, Vol. 5]
The Preamble to the Bill of Rights declares it as well;
The Conventions of a number of the States having, at the time of adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to PREVENT misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further DECLARATORY and RESTRICTIVE clauses should be added, and as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government will BEST INSURE the beneficent ends of its institution;
Resolved, by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, two-thirds of both Houses concurring, that the following articles be proposed to the Legislatures of the several States, as amendments to the Constitution of the United States; all or any of which articles, when ratified by three-fourths of the said Legislatures, to be VALID TO ALL intents and purposes as part of the said Constitution, namely:
...Amendment II
DECLARATORY; (Common Defense)
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state,
RESTRICTIVE; (Self-Defense/Preservation, The First Law of Nature).
"the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
And, there is substantial further proofs if needed. The right and duty of Self-Preservation is a Pre-existent Natural Right. And, Self-Preservation is the First Law of Nature. Our Declaration and Constitution are BASED on "the TRANCENDENT laws of Nature and of Natures God". (See Federalist #43, James Madison).
My God, E. David, I'm not even turned that way and I could kiss your whole face.
ReplyDeleteOk, maybe that was a little too enthusiastic, but great f****** job.
Thanks SA (I think!?), it was fun! Always love to pop balloon-heads. Have my doubts that the news source will print it. But I've been surprised before.
ReplyDeleteThank David C. for pointing out this pointy little-head for us!
Here was the feedback letter I sent:
ReplyDeleteJust in case anyone still doesn't know what The Second Amendment really means, here is the original text:
"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."
Then, going to the dictionary and using the definitions of the words as they were used in speech at the time the Bill of Rights was written, here is my illumination of The Second Amendment:
"Because a very effective, armed, population is essential in order for America to stay free and safe, the absolute right of everyone to own and to carry any type of weapon they choose, in any way they wish, anywhere they see fit, cannot be regulated, licensed, or even questioned in the smallest way!"
That being said, you must remember that the Bill of Rights does not "give us" any rights. It merely prohibits the government from interfering with the rights of "the people". The Bill of Rights does not apply in any way to anyone except for government, and there it is just a list of things the government is not allowed to do. It was widely recognized that rights pre-existed government, and did not come from government. It is government's only responsibility to protect the rights of the people; never to attempt to regulate or to ration those rights.
Mine feels inadequate after reading e.david's letter.