The Second Amendment was adopted on December 15, 1791, along with the rest of the Bill of Rights. Article II of the Constitution was amended to include: “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.”
Opponents of the right to bear arms by the "people” argue that the second amendment only applies to the active Militia. Of course the amendment includes both “militia” and “people” in it’s language.
If we are searching for the “intent” of the founding fathers we only have to look to The Federalist Papers of 1787. The Federalist Papers appeared in New York newspapers starting on October 27, 1787. They were a series of essays written by Hamilton, Madison and Jay, explaining and defending the constitution.
The Federalist Papers were written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, John Jay. Of the famous writers of The Federalist Papers, John Jay was actually the oldest and most distinguished of the group having drafted the New York constitution and being a prominent New York attorney and who had negotiated along with Benjamin Franklin and John Adams the Treaty of 1783 that had officially ended the Revolutionary War.
Thomas Jefferson described The Federalist Papers in 1788 as “the best commentary on the principles of government, which ever was written.”
The “intent” of the founding fathers was that all of the “people” should be armed and ready to defend the country against aggressors both domestic and foreign and of these “people” a designated number would be selected for the active Militia.
In fact, all of the “people” were not only allowed firearms, they were required to periodically appear with their firearms to show that they were prepared to assist the militia as required. Essentially everyone was in the in-active militia and a select number were in the active militia which was fully armed, equipped and trained on a regular basis. They also talked about the disruption and hardship on the labor force to require every person with a firearm to show up for professional training on a regular basis.
Hamilton wrote: “Little more can reasonably be aimed at with respect to the people at large than to have them properly armed and equipped; and in order to see that this be not neglected, it will be necessary to assemble them once or twice in the course of a year.” This would have been in addition to a regular well trained militia. As Hamilton explained, “The attention of the government ought particularly to be directed to the formation of a select corps of moderate size, upon such principles as will really fit it for service in case of need.” He went on to talk about “a large body of citizens, (not a “select corps of moderate size”) little if at all inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow citizens.” And with emphasis he said: “Where in the name of common sense are our fears to end if we may not trust our sons, our brothers, our neighbors, our fellow-citizens.”
While states do have certain rights and responsibilities under the Constitution; states and local governments do not have a right to deprive any person of their rights under the United States Constitution including the right to bear arms as was recently re-affirmed by the United States Supreme Court in 2010.
The Declaration of Independence of July 4, 1776 declared, in talking about the rights of all men said “among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness". The protection of “Life” for oneself and family was prominent in this statement. The idea that a person would be deprived of a basic right at that time to have a firearm for such protection seems unbelievable. Settling this country in the formative years would have been somewhat difficult if the “people” did not have a right to bare arms. In fact, Hamilton wrote: “The savage tribes on our Western frontier ought to be regarded as our natural enemies, their natural allies, because they have most to fear from us, and most to hope from them.”
Granted, a person who lives in a protected gated community under constant surveillance and patrol or a person living on an ivy league campus my not see a current day need for personal protection; while a person living on an isolated back road in a border area may have some concerns about protecting his family from drug traffickers. In addition, a person living in an inner city with bars on their windows may also have some concerns about protecting their family.
I was recently visiting with a gun store owner in Oceanside California a few miles from my house. We were discussing the changes in gun laws since I bought my first pistol in 1965. He advised me that both the government is making it more difficult for citizens to own even a shotgun in California. He said that recently a customer came in to buy a shotgun for a hunting trip and his application was not approved because he still owed the Department of Motor Vehicle some money for an administrative fee. He had honestly answered all of the questions on the forms and since none of the questions applied to "Debt" or "DMV", he did not expect any delay in picking up his shotgun and was surprised when told he had to go to DMV and get their approval before buying a gun. This gun dealer advised that this was not the first instance when an otherwise qualified citizen was denied a gun even though he successfully answered all of the questions.
I provided him with a link to my "New World Order" blog and explained that this is just one more effort by the government to deprive citizens of their constitutional rights in order to establish a "New World Order" because you can't control the world until you first control your own people. I reminded him of the rights lost under the "Patriot Act" and even more recently the personal physical assaults on our personal privacy in the name of defending against the "terrorist". What people don't understand is that the terrorist have already won. Without the help of our government they had no way to disarm the public, disrupt travel, increase financial burdens in the name of useless layers of government agencies and of course monitor and record all forms of communications including e-mail and telephone. He said he not only sees the problems caused to his customers he also has to deal with the real impact on his business as a result of losing sales to the general public. Of course terrorist and criminals don't have to check with the California DMV before they act.
The New World Order
I was recently visiting with a gun store owner in Oceanside California a few miles from my house. We were discussing the changes in gun laws since I bought my first pistol in 1965. He advised me that both the government is making it more difficult for citizens to own even a shotgun in California. He said that recently a customer came in to buy a shotgun for a hunting trip and his application was not approved because he still owed the Department of Motor Vehicle some money for an administrative fee. He had honestly answered all of the questions on the forms and since none of the questions applied to "Debt" or "DMV", he did not expect any delay in picking up his shotgun and was surprised when told he had to go to DMV and get their approval before buying a gun. This gun dealer advised that this was not the first instance when an otherwise qualified citizen was denied a gun even though he successfully answered all of the questions.
I provided him with a link to my "New World Order" blog and explained that this is just one more effort by the government to deprive citizens of their constitutional rights in order to establish a "New World Order" because you can't control the world until you first control your own people. I reminded him of the rights lost under the "Patriot Act" and even more recently the personal physical assaults on our personal privacy in the name of defending against the "terrorist". What people don't understand is that the terrorist have already won. Without the help of our government they had no way to disarm the public, disrupt travel, increase financial burdens in the name of useless layers of government agencies and of course monitor and record all forms of communications including e-mail and telephone. He said he not only sees the problems caused to his customers he also has to deal with the real impact on his business as a result of losing sales to the general public. Of course terrorist and criminals don't have to check with the California DMV before they act.
The New World Order
