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. --Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined." —Patrick Henry"The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." -Thomas Jefferson
When a despot has amassed a critical level of power,
only force can be used to overthrow their rule. The natural right of self-defense through the use of force is our last resort as a guard against tyranny -- which our Founders supported, put to action, and preserved for their posterity. The "militia" referred to in the Bill of Rights of the Constitution is all able-bodied men in the republic. And "well-regulated" means that they are well-trained and capable as a military force. Now, for what purpose is the militia? To repel invasions, suppress rebellions and insurrections, enforce the laws -- and especially to guard against tyranny from our own government.
GUNS AND GODFor many years I have written about Dr. Edwin Vieira's brilliant work on the Second Amendment regarding the militia. Back in May 2005, Edwin began writing columns for NWVs. Each column brilliantly lays out the history of a well regulated militia and why the states of the Union MUST reconstitute them or we will not survive the iron fist of totalitarian government looming over our heads.Our very survival depends on the states of the Union revitalizing the constitutional militia.
The only truly free men are armed men. Only slaves are prevented from the possession of arms:
THE CONSTITUTIONAL MILITIA, SLAVERY, & CONTEMPORARY "GUN CONTROL"Dr. Edwin Vieira, Jr., Ph.D., J.D.June 6, 2005NewsWithViews.com[...]The principle in operation was that the only truly free men are armed men, because an armed citizenry is necessary to maintain a free society. As the Second Amendment came to summarize the idea, "[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". A "free State" is one with "[a] well regulated Militia"; and "[a] well regulated Militia" is one composed of all "the people" actually exercising their "right * * * to keep and bear Arms", with no "infringe[ment]" by public officials. Arms in every citizen's personal possession are the precondition for freedom, freedom the hoped-for consequence of such possession (if the Militia do their part). And public officials can do nothing to interfere with such possession, being limited in their authority to ensuring that, through and in the Militia, everyone obtains and maintains private possession of firearms suitable for defending individual liberty and social order.[...]Those "kept in due Subjection and Obedience" could not be suffered to possess firearms without strict supervision and restraint, lest they attempt to employ those firearms to free themselves from that "Subjection and Obedience". So, slaves' access to and use of firearms were strictly "licensed" or otherwise controlled, in order-to minimize the number of firearms available to them;-to keep track of which slaves had access to which firearms and for what purposes;-to limit the uses to which slaves could put firearms;-to make sure that the selfsame firearms made available to slaves during the day were returned to their masters' control "at Night" (when, presumably, the danger of insurrection was most acute); and-to subject to seizure all unlicensed firearms, and any firearms possessed outside of permissible places or during prohibited periods.
REVITALIZING THE MILITIADr. Edwin Vieira, Jr., Ph.D., J.D.December 12, 2005 NewsWithViews.com [...]The essence of today's "political correctness"--that is, goodthinking according to the Establishment's lights--is to eschew "hate". What, though, is "hate"? According to the dictionary, "hate" is "intense hostility and aversion usually deriving from fear, anger, or sense of injury". Well, should every American not fear a police state? Should every American not be angry that any politician or bureaucrat is trying to impose one? Should every American not feel injured in such circumstances? A police state is political evil incarnate. So, should not it, and those who promote and administer it, be the subjects of intense hostility and aversion? Unfortunately, hostility and aversion by themselves are only a reaction, not a plan. What is the antidote to the police state now being set up in this country? The only antidote is revitalization of "the Militia of the several States". I say again: The only antidote to a police state in this country is revitalization of "the Militia of the several States". Print out this page and save it, so that when a police state has been set up, you can read it once more, and realize that you knew the answer when there was still time, even if you did nothing about it. Especially if you did nothing about it.
No comments:
Post a Comment