2nd Amendment tied to Constitutional protections!

[pbeaird]

The following is an excerpt frm the book Will We Win Our Freedom? by Paul Beaird
.................................................. ................................................

Gun ownership

It is common to speak of features of the Constitution as clear evidence that the Founding Fathers had set up a system of checks and balances, giving diverse powers to different branches of the government, so that a push for power by one branch of the government could not succeed unchecked by another branch. Thus, any law must be voted for by a majority in the House of Representatives, then in the Senate, then signed into law by the President, with the Supreme Court available to rule on its agreement with the Constitution, if the law is challenged. What is overlooked is that the Constitution established the sovereignty of the States as a barrier between the federal government and the people, also. It made provision for the States to be united by this Constitution, without any of them giving up their sovereignty, nor the citizens of any State giving up their citizenship in that State. That fact is nowhere made clearer than in the first Section of the 14th Amendment, where a change in the status of persons, as protected citizens of States, would now be compelled to have dual citizenship, making them “citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside”.

Keep this in mind when you read the exact language of the Second Amendment. “A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State. . .”. What is a State? What is necessary to its security? What purpose is a State militia to serve?
The word “State” does not refer to the federal government. The Amendments were specifying things protected from the power of the federal government. They only had 13 States at that time; we have 50 now. A militia is considered a necessity for the security of each State. Security against what?

The rest of the Second Amendment reads “. . .the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” It appears that the people are to regard their State of residence as one of the checks against an oppressive federal government and that the people are to protect their State and their own rights by means of arms. So, the ratification of the Constitution, which included the Bill of Rights, specifically named the right to keep and bear arms as a right of people and also to serve the purpose of protecting each State from the power of the federal government, should that federal government try to violate the rights of individual persons. The “rights” of States are balanced against that of the federal government in order to protect the lives and rights of the people, as individuals. Until the 14th Amendment, the Constitution did not look at Americans as citizens of the federal government, only of the State in which they resided.

That raises a question. What would be one of the first signs that some intended tyrant was trying to get in a position of such power that he could violate the security of any of the States and the rights of individual persons? Wouldn’t he try to infringe on the “right of the people to keep and bear arms”? Since arms are a necessary protection for one’s life, any legislation leading up to the government attempting to restrict the ownership of guns and ammunition, as one’s personal property, is a clear violation of one’s right to life.

Keep in mind that the Founding Fathers regarded rights as being “unalienable”, that is, inherent in the nature of human life. So, the Second Amendment is not making the right of the people to keep and bear arms dependent on providing for the security of their States, nor upon there being a militia. Gun control is a violation of a person’s right to life, no matter what the political arrangements of the day.
.................................................. ..............................................

For a copy of the complete book Will We Win Our Freedom, contact publisher provisionpublishing@yahoo.com

[THE DUKE OF ESSEX]

Excellent reading...But will the people or states have the guts to take a stand? In a perfect world this would become reality!

[Scarecrow]

so many people are still sleeping... it's sad really.

[capo2186]

people will wake one day....hopefully

[edge289]

I'm Indiana and I'm in!!!!! " IN FOR THE WIN", my slogan for a
political seat for americans protecting what our founding fathers
gave us.... "The Constitution of the United States of America"!
I'm an American with values morals and freedom! Thoses bastards
in the gov don't know what we the people are about to do, see you
then. Samuel Cotton help get me in there and many more of us we
can and will fix this mess laid upon us by corruption and liars!!!

[fuhr52]

Those elected people that have taken an oath to protect the Constitution of the United States and just voted to trash it, should be arrested for treason. But of course they will be made hero's by the media.

[pbeaird]

Excellent reading...But will the people or states have the guts to take a stand? In a perfect world this would become reality!

Hello Duke,
In a perfect world, this entire discussion would never arise, because the threat to our freedom would never bo thought of, let alone acted on. But, there is not satisfactory definition of "perfect", so we'll have to aim for what works in the real world in which America exists.

In that world, persuasion is what is required to get free men and women to see a danger, identify a strategy to deal with it and to act on that plan. That's why I think about these issues and write. I provided the argument so that you could help spread it to many, many others.

If you acquire the book, its second chapter is "Why the Left Keeps Winning" and it identifies what our tool for winning is. I believe you will identify with the weapon needed immediately.

[Bohemian]

The following is an excerpt frm the book Will We Win Our Freedom? by Paul Beaird
.................................................. ................................................

Gun ownership

It is common to speak of features of the Constitution as clear evidence that the Founding Fathers had set up a system of checks and balances, giving diverse powers to different branches of the government, so that a push for power by one branch of the government could not succeed unchecked by another branch. Thus, any law must be voted for by a majority in the House of Representatives, then in the Senate, then signed into law by the President, with the Supreme Court available to rule on its agreement with the Constitution, if the law is challenged. What is overlooked is that the Constitution established the sovereignty of the States as a barrier between the federal government and the people, also. It made provision for the States to be united by this Constitution, without any of them giving up their sovereignty, nor the citizens of any State giving up their citizenship in that State. That fact is nowhere made clearer than in the first Section of the 14th Amendment, where a change in the status of persons, as protected citizens of States, would now be compelled to have dual citizenship, making them “citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside”.

Keep this in mind when you read the exact language of the Second Amendment. “A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State. . .”. What is a State? What is necessary to its security? What purpose is a State militia to serve?
The word “State” does not refer to the federal government. The Amendments were specifying things protected from the power of the federal government. They only had 13 States at that time; we have 50 now. A militia is considered a necessity for the security of each State. Security against what?

The rest of the Second Amendment reads “. . .the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” It appears that the people are to regard their State of residence as one of the checks against an oppressive federal government and that the people are to protect their State and their own rights by means of arms. So, the ratification of the Constitution, which included the Bill of Rights, specifically named the right to keep and bear arms as a right of people and also to serve the purpose of protecting each State from the power of the federal government, should that federal government try to violate the rights of individual persons. The “rights” of States are balanced against that of the federal government in order to protect the lives and rights of the people, as individuals. Until the 14th Amendment, the Constitution did not look at Americans as citizens of the federal government, only of the State in which they resided.

That raises a question. What would be one of the first signs that some intended tyrant was trying to get in a position of such power that he could violate the security of any of the States and the rights of individual persons? Wouldn’t he try to infringe on the “right of the people to keep and bear arms”? Since arms are a necessary protection for one’s life, any legislation leading up to the government attempting to restrict the ownership of guns and ammunition, as one’s personal property, is a clear violation of one’s right to life.

Keep in mind that the Founding Fathers regarded rights as being “unalienable”, that is, inherent in the nature of human life. So, the Second Amendment is not making the right of the people to keep and bear arms dependent on providing for the security of their States, nor upon there being a militia. Gun control is a violation of a person’s right to life, no matter what the political arrangements of the day.
.................................................. ..............................................

For a copy of the complete book Will We Win Our Freedom, contact publisher provisionpublishing@yahoo.com

Excellent Suggestion!

Its posts like these that help WE THE PEOPLE, educate the SHEEPLE of the ObamaNation that their rights do not come from government...

Keep it up folks! We need to get more people involved in the process & the restoration of the Constitutional Republic we were founded as...

Educate the SHEEPLE, when they start talking about how great FDR, Teddy Roosevelt, Abe Lincoln, Woodrow Wilson, and LBJ were and the fallacy about them that is purported in many text books used in the public schools system...
These Presidents were not Heroes, they were Constitution Trampling Tyrants...
AND until Obama & Company; FDR was the closest thing this country has seen to a Dictator...

Constitutional Republic 101: Your Rights Don't Come From Government...
Oath Keepers: CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC 101: YOUR RIGHTS DON’T COME FROM GOVERNMENT