Politically speaking, nothing I can think of worries me more than Supreme Court justices happy to vote my God-given rights away. What about unalienable do they not understand? In the U.S. Constitution, our founders enumerated “certain unalienable rights” and employed the phrase “among them…,” indicating other natural rights that may not have been specifically listed.
But, what was included, either explicitly or implicitly, was a right to property, a right to self-defense, and a right to the means for defending oneself: The Second Amendment. How can we fully exercise our human right to self-defense without a concurrent right to acquire the most effective means to that defense? A gun. If firearms weren’t the best and most practical weapons for self-defense, governments wouldn’t issue them to the police and military.
When I heard about retired Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens’ recent call to repeal the Second Amendment, a high voltage shudder shot through me. Then I remembered, Stevens is retired—whew! But I’m sure some current justices share his anti-gun views.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t the good justice swear an oath to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States,” which contained the Second Amendment when he swore it?
How does Justice Stevens expect people to protect themselves after he repeals a right bestowed upon them by “Nature and Nature’s God?” It’s inarguable that self-defense is the natural right of any human being.
The left seems to believe that the Second Amendment refers to a militia comprised of cops, army, national guard, or a government entity, rather than individual citizens. Answer this: Why, when penning the Bill of Rights, of The People, could anyone interpret the Second Amendment as applying to the government when that document was created specifically to protect The People from the government?
Of course, some people may choose not to protect themselves with firearms; this is also their right. But what about law-abiding people who want to continue exercising their Second Amendment rights? Why such disrespect for the American people?
What if one of those Americans is standing at a dimly lit bus stop, waiting for the bus to take him home to his family from the night shift? What if some thug approaches with his hand in his pocket, implying a weapon? What if the thug doesn’t seem all that concerned whether this person continues living? I bet Justice Stevens would feel better with a gun in this situation.
Is Justice Stevens suggesting this America has no genuine right to self-defense? Because that’s exactly what a call to repeal the Second Amendment accomplishes. If people have no right to keep and bear the most efficient means to ensure their self-defense, then they have no real right to self-defense.
And, if His Honor thinks the cops are going to be around to save people, I can tell you from experience—most often, they won’t be. If the government can’t guarantee your safety, which it can’t, then how can it take away your right to the best means to protect yourself? In fact, if you take away the right to the leading method of self-defense against an armed attacker, you effectively take away the right to self-defense.
Let’s borrow the First Amendment as an analogy: What if people have a right to free speech, but you take away their right to own and use a computer? The left doesn’t exactly support conservatives writing their political opinions, considering it “hate-speech,” right? It’s been too easy for people to express their views with the best means of modern communication. Therefore, no more keeping and bearing computers.
Hey, what are you complaining about? You still have a First Amendment right to free speech. If you want to grab a pencil, pen, or crayon to express your opinion, go for it. Now, you’d certainly be able to express yourself with these tools, right? I mean, people had no computers, or semi-automatic pistols and rifles, back in the 18th and 19th centuries. They used pen and ink—just like they used flintlock muskets.
So maybe the analogy isn’t perfect, but you get my point. When leftist governments take away your gun rights, ostensibly, you’ll still maintain your right to self-defense because you would still have a right to life and liberty.
So, if a criminal threatens you or your family with a gun, what…? You pull out your knife, your baseball bat, or… your cell phone. Yes, that’s it. See if you can dial 911 and the cops show up before the bad guy pulls that trigger.
Justice Stevens would have us believe the Second Amendment is a “relic of the eighteenth century.” Many leftist comments and behaviors indicate they must believe the First Amendment’s protection of religious freedom and free speech are also relics that have outlived the modern era.
The sad thing is that some people, even those who have served it, would trash our sacred document. The Constitution provides our nation with its true worth. With it, we as a people can continue endeavoring to create “a more perfect union.” Without it, we would be condemned to drift aimlessly, victims to the whims of political experimentation and abuses, driven by leftist political ideology, until we achieve that historically elusive socialist Utopia we’ve been assured can exist, if only…
