Why the Second Amendment?

Once again and on cue, the gun-control zealots are calling for the repeal of the Second Amendment.  Former Supreme Court justice John Paul Stevens parroted the gun-grabber narrative in his recently published New York Times article: "[t]he demonstrators should seek more effective and lasting reform.  They should demand a repeal of the Second Amendment."  He further bloviates that the Second is a relic of the 18th century.  It's a sorry state of affairs when a Supreme Court justice who was tasked with upholding the U.S. Constitution – including the Bill of Rights – must be reminded why the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.  You'd think a constitutional scholar would know these things.  It's also proof positive that advanced age and wisdom are not necessarily synonymous.

The Bill of Rights Institute provides an excellent brief background on the first ten amendments to the U.S. Constitution.  Simply put and stated eloquently, "[t]he Bill of Rights is a list of limits on government power."  Unfortunately, not only are there those in favor of surrendering their Second Amendment right, but these same people believe that government forces are incapable of oppression, subversion, coercion, or any number of other forms of tyranny.  My advice to this particular group of naïve, nattering nabobs?  Pick up any American history book and revisit why America's Founding Fathers were familiar with government oppression – they lived it, and many gave their lives fighting it.  As history has shown time and time again, tyrants conquer the populace by instilling fear.  They rely on killing or sinister threats of harm and injury to control the masses.  Heinous killing sprees and wretched oppression of the citizenry are the result of a people unable to defend themselves.  

Naysayers and doubters are quick to counter with claims that nothing of the sort could happen in the 21st century.  History proves otherwise.  A quick review of the 13 most monstrous tyrants of the 20th century will reveal one thing in common: hundreds of millions of dead people who were hopelessly unable to rise up with arms and overthrow their oppressors.  In most cases, outside forces and circumstances were required to bring each of these dictators to an inglorious end, but not before millions were sacrificed, state resources and treasuries looted, and generations of survivors beaten down to pathetic shells of human beings.  A third-generation dictator still lords it over North Korea, aided and abetted by a 21st-century media machine that would make Adolf Hitler's minister of propaganda, Joseph Goebbels, proud.  An excellent accounting of exactly how Hitler disarmed an unsuspecting German public can be found in Stephen P. Halbrook's book, Gun Control in the Third Reich: Disarming the Jews and "Enemies of the State."  There's no need to rehash the history of Germany's most notorious monster and the atrocity that occurred not only in Germany, but all across Europe.  In fact, Mr. Halbrook's book ought to be on the required reading list in all American high school civics classes.

Categorically and in harsh condemnation of Justice Steven's opinion, the Second Amendment is by no means an 18th-century relic.  Far from it.  The Second Amendment ensures that people elected to public office uphold their sworn oath to defend the U.S. Constitution and abide by the Bill of Rights.  Without the Second Amendment, how easy would it be for someone or a group of people opposing democracy to usurp the American government?  Do the words "fundamental transformation" ring a bell?

Keep in mind that a slick and sophisticated media machine is already in place and operates as the progressive liberal purveyor of propaganda.  It is not simply a coincidence that the group of people who are working feverishly to rescind the Second Amendment are the same group of people opposed to free speech.  They demand stifling regulation (suppression) of media outlets opposed to their agenda.  They have recruited moneyed supporters willing to expend millions of dollars in order to achieve their nefarious goal – divesting law-abiding citizens of their firearms.

Constitutional preservationist speaker and author Michael Badnarik put it bluntly: "[t]he Second Amendment is our emergency cut-off switch for a government run amok."  I agree.

Once again and on cue, the gun-control zealots are calling for the repeal of the Second Amendment.  Former Supreme Court justice John Paul Stevens parroted the gun-grabber narrative in his recently published New York Times article: "[t]he demonstrators should seek more effective and lasting reform.  They should demand a repeal of the Second Amendment."  He further bloviates that the Second is a relic of the 18th century.  It's a sorry state of affairs when a Supreme Court justice who was tasked with upholding the U.S. Constitution – including the Bill of Rights – must be reminded why the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.  You'd think a constitutional scholar would know these things.  It's also proof positive that advanced age and wisdom are not necessarily synonymous.

The Bill of Rights Institute provides an excellent brief background on the first ten amendments to the U.S. Constitution.  Simply put and stated eloquently, "[t]he Bill of Rights is a list of limits on government power."  Unfortunately, not only are there those in favor of surrendering their Second Amendment right, but these same people believe that government forces are incapable of oppression, subversion, coercion, or any number of other forms of tyranny.  My advice to this particular group of naïve, nattering nabobs?  Pick up any American history book and revisit why America's Founding Fathers were familiar with government oppression – they lived it, and many gave their lives fighting it.  As history has shown time and time again, tyrants conquer the populace by instilling fear.  They rely on killing or sinister threats of harm and injury to control the masses.  Heinous killing sprees and wretched oppression of the citizenry are the result of a people unable to defend themselves.  

Naysayers and doubters are quick to counter with claims that nothing of the sort could happen in the 21st century.  History proves otherwise.  A quick review of the 13 most monstrous tyrants of the 20th century will reveal one thing in common: hundreds of millions of dead people who were hopelessly unable to rise up with arms and overthrow their oppressors.  In most cases, outside forces and circumstances were required to bring each of these dictators to an inglorious end, but not before millions were sacrificed, state resources and treasuries looted, and generations of survivors beaten down to pathetic shells of human beings.  A third-generation dictator still lords it over North Korea, aided and abetted by a 21st-century media machine that would make Adolf Hitler's minister of propaganda, Joseph Goebbels, proud.  An excellent accounting of exactly how Hitler disarmed an unsuspecting German public can be found in Stephen P. Halbrook's book, Gun Control in the Third Reich: Disarming the Jews and "Enemies of the State."  There's no need to rehash the history of Germany's most notorious monster and the atrocity that occurred not only in Germany, but all across Europe.  In fact, Mr. Halbrook's book ought to be on the required reading list in all American high school civics classes.

Categorically and in harsh condemnation of Justice Steven's opinion, the Second Amendment is by no means an 18th-century relic.  Far from it.  The Second Amendment ensures that people elected to public office uphold their sworn oath to defend the U.S. Constitution and abide by the Bill of Rights.  Without the Second Amendment, how easy would it be for someone or a group of people opposing democracy to usurp the American government?  Do the words "fundamental transformation" ring a bell?

Keep in mind that a slick and sophisticated media machine is already in place and operates as the progressive liberal purveyor of propaganda.  It is not simply a coincidence that the group of people who are working feverishly to rescind the Second Amendment are the same group of people opposed to free speech.  They demand stifling regulation (suppression) of media outlets opposed to their agenda.  They have recruited moneyed supporters willing to expend millions of dollars in order to achieve their nefarious goal – divesting law-abiding citizens of their firearms.

Constitutional preservationist speaker and author Michael Badnarik put it bluntly: "[t]he Second Amendment is our emergency cut-off switch for a government run amok."  I agree.