As Americans we have a right to overthrow an unjust government. There, I said it. Why is this so desperately controversial? Sure, no one wants to do, it but the fact remains: revolution is a right. Ben Carson understands this, along with many on the right. There’s a fundamental fear that if the government can take your guns, then they’ll take everything else as well.From Politico:
The left has a second amendment problem. It believes that the right to abortion and gay marriage are fixed in the Constitution — somewhere or other, you’ll just have to trust them — but the black-and-white guarantee of the right of individuals to own guns is a big misunderstanding.On this issue, the left doesn’t particularly like or comprehend the country it lives in, especially that it was founded by men who distrusted government and sought to limit it by protecting certain essential individual rights, including gun ownership.
The Second Amendment says, “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.” Liberals can readily accept all of that — except the part about not infringing on the right of the people to bear arms, which they think is a bit much.
They have their own articles of faith: It’s crazy to believe that gun rights were meant in part to protect us from the government (or, relatedly, that there is a right to revolution). The Second Amendment is an anachronism and ink blot. And anyone who tells you otherwise, like Ben Carson, is a kook.The acute liberal commentator Ed Kilgore wrote a piece at Talking Points Memo the other day titled, “The Cult of the Second Amendment.” Think about how odd it is to accuse your opponents of having a cultish attachment to … the nation’s foundational law. Aren’t we all supposed to cherish (or at least pretend to cherish) the Constitution, and especially the Bill of Rights?
If we can go ahead and admit that many on the left hate the constitution and want to change it, then we can have an honest discussion here. Mark my words that it’s no strange thing that Obama’s used the power of the pen to get around law. It will become the norm if there’s a 3rd Obama term. Clinton has already vowed to do whatever she can to get guns out of the hands of people who shouldn’t have them. We all know what that means. They already think no one should have them. And doing all she can is simply code for “Executive Order.”
The main purpose of the Second Amendment was to enshrine in the Constitution the pre-existing and natural right to self-defense, and yes, that included defense against government (and especially a standing army). The context is easy to understand here — the Founders had just waged a war of revolution against an an overweening state, using guns. If they had all been disarmed prior to 1776, the result might have turned out a little differently.Who are some other dangerously ill-informed people who agree with Ben Carson about gun rights and the protection they afford against tyranny?
Well, there’s Tench Coxe, a delegate to the Continental Congress from Pennsylvania, who wrote in 1789, “As civil rulers, not having their duty to the people before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as the military forces which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirmed by the article in their right to keep and bear their private arms.”
When government tries to suggest that no one be armed, there’s a problem. Dare I call it a conspiracy? When the powers that be want to “take care” of you with entitlements. When they want to take from those who have and give it to those who don’t. When they do not value human rights from conception. When they want to make deals with our enemies.When they want to take away even the ability of you to protect yourself from those who would do you harm. Maybe it is all shrouded in the fact that they want to do you harm and leave you with no means of protection.
[Note: This article was written by Earl Hall]