“The purpose of having citizens armed with paramilitary weapons is to allow them to engage in paramilitary actions”
Brett, like practically every other person seeking to diminish our constitutional rights, either does not understand the purpose of the Second Amendment or refuses to address it, writing, “Gun advocates will be hard-pressed to explain why the average American citizen needs an assault weapon with a high-capacity magazine other than for recreational purposes.” The answer to this question is straightforward: The purpose of having citizens armed with paramilitary weapons is to allow them to engage in paramilitary actions. The Second Amendment is not about Bambi and burglars — whatever a well-regulated militia is, it is not a hunting party or a sport-clays club. It is remarkable to me that any educated person — let alone a Harvard Law graduate — believes that the second item on the Bill of Rights is a constitutional guarantee of enjoying a recreational activity…
Liberals are forever asking: “Why would anybody need a gun like that?” And the answer is: because we are not serfs. We are a free people living under a republic of our own construction. We may consent to be governed, but we will not be ruled.









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next »
the founders were intent on ensuring my right to free speech, which the second amendment has come to threaten.
sesquipedalian on December 28, 2012 at 2:49 PM
I really hate to say it but he will be one of the greatest rulers of all time. His cult will make sure of that. He is untouchable and invincible. He is a true tinpot dictator and loved by billions around the world. I never could understand why people latch on to these guys. It never works out.
Dr. Frank Enstine on December 28, 2012 at 2:49 PM
Someone finally gets what the Second Amendment was about.
BigGator5 on December 28, 2012 at 2:50 PM
HAHAHA That’s so absurd, I think you might actually believe it.
Fenris on December 28, 2012 at 2:50 PM
Nah, closer to 1917… or 1929
dogsoldier on December 28, 2012 at 2:51 PM
Which is why we need personal RPGs, personal tanks, and personal nukes. And maybe a few of the ray guns they have in the works.
The Rogue Tomato on December 28, 2012 at 2:51 PM
Anachronistic says the guy who claims that in 2012, embryology and the beginnings of human life are still vague and dubious.
The Count on December 28, 2012 at 2:51 PM
No. The entire body of the citizenry is the militia. The government may call for volunteers from the militia, but it cannot control them as it does the Guard or Reserves.
The Constitution requires that the Federal Government establish and maintain a Navy in perpetuity, but the Regular Army must be reauthorized every two years. The founders had lived under the threat of a standing army and didn’t want another “King’s Army” being used to suppress their liberties.
The purpose of the 2nd amendment is to ensure that the people are armed as well as those who would seek to suppress their rights and liberties. Remember that it was the British Army which was sent o seize the citizen’s stores of cannon, powder, muskets, bayonets, and paper cartridges at Lexington and Concord. The people, the “militia” refused to permit this to happen without a fight, and thus “fired the shot heard ’round the world”.
TKindred on December 28, 2012 at 2:52 PM
climate change.
instant win.
sesquipedalian on December 28, 2012 at 2:52 PM
No need to emphasize that your convictions and principles are determined by a calendar sheet (and probably have the same lifespan). Thats what we expect from liberals. Slaves of the zeitgeist.
Valkyriepundit on December 28, 2012 at 2:53 PM
Exactly who is placing a gun to your head stating you need to remain silent? Well, other than the government.
ButterflyDragon on December 28, 2012 at 2:53 PM
?????
It seems to me the biggest threat to free speech is the left. That’s the entire purpose of political correctness … self censorship.
What does the right to bear arms have to do with that?
darwin on December 28, 2012 at 2:53 PM
next time the brits invade, we’ll just re-instate the second amendment. deal?
sesquipedalian on December 28, 2012 at 2:54 PM
Hahahahahahaha
Please stop before you embarrass yourself further.
darwin on December 28, 2012 at 2:54 PM
Idiot.
Kenosha Kid on December 28, 2012 at 2:55 PM
Free speech is anachronistic, and the founders wanted to amend the Constitution when there were too many media nuts. Look at the Rodney King riots, stirred up by an irresponsible media. We need media control.
Second Amendment does not threaten the First. You aren’t makin any logically argument anymore. Go crawl back under your bridge.
rbj on December 28, 2012 at 2:55 PM
uh, wut? no one’s going to shoot you for coming out.
The Count on December 28, 2012 at 2:56 PM
This statement is total nonsense. This is a special kind of stupid.
dogsoldier on December 28, 2012 at 2:56 PM
suppresses the free expression of ideas through intimidation.
sesquipedalian on December 28, 2012 at 2:56 PM
The 1st insures your right to be this stupid.
Schadenfreude on December 28, 2012 at 2:57 PM
It’s lib logic. I think they teach it at most of our colleges and universities.
darwin on December 28, 2012 at 2:57 PM
Put the bong down and back away from it, dude. The only ones being intimidated are law abiding gun owners. A blog reference is lame…
dogsoldier on December 28, 2012 at 2:59 PM
you sure?
sesquipedalian on December 28, 2012 at 2:59 PM
Well … no. Good try though.
Intimidation is more like what you guys do.
darwin on December 28, 2012 at 2:59 PM
It’s like having an argument with a week-old jelly doughnut.
Kenosha Kid on December 28, 2012 at 3:00 PM
it’s a photo, idiot.
sesquipedalian on December 28, 2012 at 3:00 PM
Sadly, I agree, having witnessed it first hand.
dogsoldier on December 28, 2012 at 3:00 PM
You really don’t get it, do you?
TKindred on December 28, 2012 at 3:00 PM
On some blog. Which any smart person would avoid clicking on. Like I said, man, drop the bong. You have seriously depleted your reservoir of brain cells. If you have one left, it’s lonely.
dogsoldier on December 28, 2012 at 3:02 PM
Yes, because we all know that hypothesizing explanations for modest ~100 yr temp fluctuations from 4,500,000 years of climate tumult is the same as DNA, which scientists have already used for cloning animals.
Falsifiable science. Look it up, moron.
The Count on December 28, 2012 at 3:03 PM
No he doesn’t. The idea of what’s happening in Syria happening here, is unthinkable to him. Maybe even impossible.
dogsoldier on December 28, 2012 at 3:03 PM
sesquipedalian wants the country disarmed, and it’s taxes raised. Then he wants to take your fuel, set your thermostat, tell you what car to drive, what food to eat, what you can say and what you must think.
Is it any wonder people are feeling very uneasy about liberals?
darwin on December 28, 2012 at 3:04 PM
The Brits have invaded and they are you.
antipc on December 28, 2012 at 3:05 PM
uummm…trollcot?
Knott Buyinit on December 28, 2012 at 3:07 PM
don’t upset the baby jesus.
sesquipedalian on December 28, 2012 at 3:07 PM
They will be after our forks next. Forks cause obesity. Look how many people forks kill every year. Especially those military style assault forks, like the one I used the other day to load my plate with turkey.
dogsoldier on December 28, 2012 at 3:08 PM
Then he’ll get his feminist panties in a bunch when we want to defend the unborn.
Yeah, I went there.
BigGator5 on December 28, 2012 at 3:08 PM
You don’t even need to buy a ticket; just watch the news. What’s happening to the tiny handful of liberal Muslims, who sat around blubbering about how gosh-awfully nice freedom would be, but never for a moment thought about the need to PROTECT that freedom.
“Up against the wall. No, a couple of inches to the left if you don’t mind; hands a little higher; ah, there, now you’ve got it; that’s perfect….”
I suspect that some of the more genteel Soviet overlords might have actually shed a tear or two when the time came to murder all of their loyal, albeit dim-witted, pets. But that’s usually not the case; the REAL radicals hate their dilettante compatriots even more than they hate the men and women who have the courage to do something besides whine about freedom.
logis on December 28, 2012 at 3:09 PM
Tenche Coxe: “Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American…
Rep. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts: “What, sir, is the use of a militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty.” Rep. of Massachusetts, I Annals of Congress at 750 (August 17, 1789).
Alexander Hamilton: “…that standing army can never be formidable (threatening) to the liberties of the people, while there is a large body of citizens, little if at all inferior to them in the use of arms.” (Federalist Paper #29)
Patrick Henry: “The people have a right to keep and bear arms.” (Elliott, Debates at 185)
Patrick Henry: “Are we at last brought to such a humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our own defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in our possession and under our own direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?, 3 Elliot Debates 168-169.
Thomas Jefferson: “No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.”
Richard Henry Lee: “A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves…and include all men capable of bearing arms.” (Additional letters from the Federal Farmer, at 169, 1788)
James Madison: “As the greatest danger to liberty is from large standing armies, it is best to prevent them by an effectual provision for a good militia.” (notes of debates in the 1787 Federal Convention)
George Mason: “I ask you sir, who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people.” (Elliott, Debates, 425-426)
and [when] the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any color or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction.” – Sir George Tucker, Judge of the Virginia Supreme Court and U.S. District Court of Virginia in I Blackstone COMMENTARIES Sir George Tucker Ed., 1803, pg. 300 (App.)
George Washington: “A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government.”
sharrukin on December 28, 2012 at 3:10 PM
In DC, at the moment – The concentration of idiots in one room
Schadenfreude on December 28, 2012 at 3:11 PM
I won’t. Just don’t report me to the Holy High Priest, Al Gore. I’m afraid he might put some reverse chakra spell on me.
The Count on December 28, 2012 at 3:12 PM
time was not kind on them, was it?
sesquipedalian on December 28, 2012 at 3:12 PM
Lincoln is dead too.
Schadenfreude on December 28, 2012 at 3:16 PM
How so? How does my owning a gun threaten your free speech? You’re even allowed to SAY you’re taking away my guns.
You’re free to do and say what you like. And if I carry a gun, you’re still just as free. All guns do is give people a way to defend their rights.
hawksruleva on December 28, 2012 at 3:17 PM
Feel free to explain why the people of the US don’t need to fear liberals … especially when everything they do must be imposed on the populace with the force of government. Again, everything the left does must be forced upon people.
Give me the reasons why people shouldn’t fear them.
darwin on December 28, 2012 at 3:19 PM
the constitution is not a living breathing thing. It is up to the people that follow it to ensure it stays up to the times. it is a sad sad thing that men alive 250 years ago were so much smarter then our finest minds today. what does that say about our education system that are children do not even learn what is needed to ensure their freedoms
unseen on December 28, 2012 at 3:19 PM
Seriously, quit posting while drunk. You’re not even making sense now.
ButterflyDragon on December 28, 2012 at 3:20 PM
the constitution was written by people absolutely clueless about the modern world. it’s a fact. it’s like using napoleonic tactics to win modern wars.
sesquipedalian on December 28, 2012 at 3:21 PM
man do you got it halfas@backwards. The 2nd was the way the founders ensured your right to free speech dumbas@
unseen on December 28, 2012 at 3:21 PM
Please expand and give examples of their cluelessness.
darwin on December 28, 2012 at 3:22 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next »