Gun and Game Forum banner

1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,251 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Vice President Cheney signed on to a brief filed by a majority of Congress yesterday that urged the Supreme Court to uphold a ruling that the District of Columbia`s handgun ban is unconstitutional, breaking with his own administration`s official position.

More...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13 Posts
A bit off topic,but not

"Article the fourth:A well regulated militia,being necissary to the security of the state,the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

The position of too many courts nationwide:"The 4th amendment gaurantees a civic right to bear arms as applies to military service".
The courts that uphold this argument are upholding the first part of the law.
BUT
They are blatantly ignoring the part about "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

If the law were correctly interpreted,it would mean both,that the right to militia service and the right to civic duty is necissary to security,and that the right to own firearms shall not be infringed.This means that private ownership of firearms and civic groups that use them to uphold the security of the state(militias),unattached and unbeholden to the government,are legally protected rights gauranteed by the constitution.

By ignoring the second part and upholding the first,and manipulating that till it means nothing other than "you have the right to serve in the military",the courts have truly deviated from the real meaning of the law.
In its essence,the Constitution of The United States seeks to preserve the balance of power between government and the people;wholly in the favor of the people.The fourth amendment seeks to enforce and uphold the spirit of the constitution by imparting the right to form militia against tyranny.It grants this right by gaurantee that citizens will have private stocks of arms to supply their militias.It is quite contradictory to assume otherwise,as a militia is dependent on the arms brought to it by the citizens who are members of it.Where else do militias find arms?Sometimes they are issued arms by the government,buy by and large they are armed with what they personally own.
It is irrelevant to argue that the laws of 300 years ago no longer apply to today,because we are in a different society.Never has the need been greater in the history of america for citizens' militias and the weapons owned privatly by the people who constitute them.
I may be viewed as a bit crazy to say this,but had there been armed citizens on those planes on 9/11/01,the outcome would have been wholly different.And I cant imagine a more relevant application of "necissary to the security of the state" and "the right of the people to keep and bear arms" than that sad day in our recent history.
We have been robbed,America. Robbed of the right to defend our own country,and ourselves, by government beurocrats who insist we "let them take care of it" and the groups of spineless cowards who would rather hire another cop than take responsability for their own safety and that of their nation.
This is the true travesty of modern America.
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
Top