Second Amendment is not license for treason, armed revolt
According to some, the primary purpose of the Second Amendment is to ensure that citizens have enough firepower to overthrow the federal government, should it become necessary to do so. If the government ever loses its fear of such a revolt, the theory goes, our liberty ends and tyranny begins.
Let me be blunt: That is mythological claptrap. But like a lot of mythological claptrap, it can push weak-minded people — the Timothy McVeighs of the world — to do stupid and dangerous things.
It is certainly true that when the Second Amendment was drafted back in the 18th century, it was plausible to believe that an armed citizenry could be a check on overweening government power. Back then, there wasn’t much difference in the weapons available to private citizens and the weapons available to the military. It could have been, and sometimes was, a more or less even fight.
Today, that is no longer the case, and it hasn’t been the case for a century or longer. Around the world, governments have access to a range of weaponry that private citizens have no hope of matching or withstanding. There is simply no comparison between the brute, deadly force that a government can wield and that wielded by private citizens, individually or collectively. Technology has rendered that aspect of the Second Amendment a dead letter.
If you want to rejuvate that aspect of the Second Amendment, you have to be willing to grant private citizens access to fully automatic weapons, Stinger anti-aircraft missiles, grenade launchers, etc. And it’s not going to happen.
That’s not just my opinion. It is also the opinion of the U.S. Supreme Court, as expressed by one of its most conservative members, Justice Antonin Scalia, in the most important Second Amendment opinion the court ever issued.
In District of Columbia v. Heller, issued in 2008, Scalia and the court made it clear for the first time that the Second Amendment “protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia.” But in that same opinion, Scalia brushed aside claims that the Second Amendment guarantees citizens the means to armed revolution. He concluded that technology has rendered that part of the amendment an archaic artifact, because “a militia, to be as effective as militias in the 18th century, would require sophisticated arms that are highly unusual in society at large” and that “no amount of small arms could be useful against modern-day bombers and tanks.”
For that reason, Scalia made it clear that the Second Amendment “does not protect those weapons not typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes,” and that the government is fully within its rights to ban military-style weaponry.
In Iraq, for example, gun ownership is extremely widespread, with many if not most households owning fully automatic weapons that would be banned in this country. Yet Saddam Hussein had little trouble imposing and maintaining a brutal dictatorship in that country for decades. He did not confiscate guns, because he understood that such guns posed no real threat to his tyranny.
And as Joshua Keating notes at ForeignPolicy.com, look at Tunisia and Egypt, where private gun ownership is very low but citizens have nonetheless managed to overthrow brutal military dictatorships. If government now has a massive advantage in terms of brute force, innovations such as Twitter, Facebook, cellphones and satellite TV have more than offset it in the cause of freedom.
Guns don’t overthrow tyranny or guarantee liberty. People do.
– Jay Bookman
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
1,326 comments Add your comment
pogo
January 17th, 2013
4:36 pm
It is sad that Granny Lizard actually seems to be celebrating that the republicans will have to cave on raising the debt ceiling. NONE of us should be celebrating the fact that our nation can no longer pay its bills. She just goes to show how short sighted and ideologically entrenched the liberals like her really are.
DebbieDoRight - The FB Player's Imaginary Girlfriend From Canada
January 17th, 2013
4:36 pm
I’m curious if I could actually purchase an M102 to tow behind my suburban.
But Bro — you will probably only be able to afford ONE round. Besides, the M102 is old school — here’s the puppy you should be rolling with now:
The M119A1 fires all standard NATO semi-fixed ammunition as well as special rocket-assisted projectiles, including:
M1 High explosive
M314 Illuminating
M60/M60A2 Smoke Cartridge
M913 HERA Range: 19.5 km
M760 HE Range: 14.5 km
OooRah!
Brosephus™
January 17th, 2013
4:36 pm
Real Scootter
Since the M102 was replaced by the M119, I know there’s gotta be a stash of them somewhere where they can let a brother put a little cash and carry on one. They know I’m not going to do anything stupid and risk my employment.
Imagine how much more productive farming would be if I could aerate the ground while enriching it with minute biodegradable fertilizer bits. I think everybody would be happy because it would be organic.
MrLiberty
January 17th, 2013
4:37 pm
Being president is also not a license for treason.
The Declaration of Independence is very clear that it is the right and responsibility of people to throw off and change their government if it becomes destructive of liberty and freedom and no longer protects these rights. The Declaration of Independence is as much a part of our laws as the Constitution.
Non-violent resistance is a proud tradition.
The second amendment was put in place in case the non-violent means of protecting liberty and freedom fails.
Morality?
January 17th, 2013
4:38 pm
Deer – in Georgia – do not run in herds – but you wouldn’t know.
td
January 17th, 2013
4:38 pm
Brosephus™
January 17th, 2013
4:33 pm
Policing would be more efficient and a great deal of crimes could be stopped before they actually happened if police could monitor or data mine all phone calls and emails.Do you want them to have this capability?
Patriot Act homie!!!
Does not help catch local criminals or local police. YET.
Fred ™
January 17th, 2013
4:39 pm
josef: I WAS on the list for “the” boa but I think DDR kicked me off…………
Doggone/GA
January 17th, 2013
4:40 pm
“The Declaration of Independence is very clear that it is the right and responsibility of people to throw off and change their government”
In case you hadn’t noticed, the DOI is NOT the law of the land.
josef
January 17th, 2013
4:41 pm
BROSEPHUS
“…because it would be organic.”
I’m thinking of going into the potato gun bidness…for the granola head niche market…climb up in an endangered species tree with that baby.. : -)
Brosephus™
January 17th, 2013
4:41 pm
Does not help catch local criminals or local police. YET.
And you know this, how?
Doggone/GA
January 17th, 2013
4:42 pm
“Deer – in Georgia – do not run in herds – but you wouldn’t know”
Deer – in Georgia – DO run in herds. I see them often when I’m out looking for waterfalls. They’re not BIG herds, but I’ve seen as many as 20 or so.
josef
January 17th, 2013
4:43 pm
FRED
Well, it IS an exclusive club and we do have to hold onto our standards…many are called, but few are chosen…
Real Scootter
January 17th, 2013
4:43 pm
Brosephus™
January 17th, 2013
4:36 pm
ROFLMAO!!!!!
Brosephus™
January 17th, 2013
4:44 pm
DDR @ 4:36
Just for you…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CC_9JIOpED4
Morality?
January 17th, 2013
4:45 pm
If deer did run in herds – then there is still the question about legal quota – which would discourage you from mowing them all down – OH I FORGOT CRIMINALS DON”T CONCERN THEMSELVES WITH LAWS. Criminals don’t care how many gun laws you enact….. it will help them more than hender them since they usually attack law abiding citizens that will be restricted from protecting themselves with a meaningful weapon.
DebbieDoRight - The FB Player's Imaginary Girlfriend From Canada
January 17th, 2013
4:45 pm
Fred: DDR: He also didn’t get a bite on his racist, “white redneck buys gun, black thug buckwheat steals it” either lol.
Hiya Fred!! Well, he flunked out of trolling school so that’s the best he could do…..
=========
All — If you ever wonder who’s REALLY behind these “They’re KILLING our 2nd Ammendment Rights!!!” Bullcrap then you need to look no further than the board of the NRA — found out today that ONE of the board members actually LIVES a few miles from Newtown. She’s too embarrassed to speak or show her face after what’s happened.
Another member, (surprise, surprise!!), is the CEO of the Bushmaster rifle.
They’re not protesting their 2nd ammendment rights!! They’re protesting their fear of loosing revenue.
Gotta go………looks awful outside.
Later Gators!
Oh and Hi and Bye josef!!
Fred ™
January 17th, 2013
4:46 pm
pogo
January 17th, 2013
4:36 pm
It is sad that Granny Lizard actually seems to be celebrating that the republicans will have to cave on raising the debt ceiling. NONE of us should be celebrating the fact that our nation can no longer pay its bills. She just goes to show how short sighted and ideologically entrenched the liberals like her really are.
++++++++++++++++++++
Since until NOW the Republicans have voted TO raise the debt ceiling (guess how many times for Georgie Poo) I guess that shows how Obama/USA hate filled YOU are and how little you care for this Country. Oh and also how uninformed you are.
You folks are just sad. You make bunnies cry.
Brosephus™
January 17th, 2013
4:46 pm
Deer – in Georgia – do not run in herds – but you wouldn’t know.
And only an uninformed jackass would ASSUME I was even referring to doing anything in Georgia. I’m a true Alabamian, bro. Born and bred, and I will die an Alabamian. And deer in Alabama run in big herds if you know where to go find them.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
January 17th, 2013
4:46 pm
Doggone/GA, there’s your problem. You’re out in the real world. In the prepper bunker, deer do not run in herds. They’re prepackaged.
josef
January 17th, 2013
4:47 pm
DOGGONE
Beat me to it…when we were up in Coosa used to see groups all the time…I grew up calling them a bevy of deer, Unmentionable called them a band…
Doggone/GA
January 17th, 2013
4:47 pm
“If deer did run in herds”
not if…when
Morality?
January 17th, 2013
4:48 pm
Dog – Where I’m from 20 ain’t no herd – it’s a party.
Ben
January 17th, 2013
4:49 pm
Try telling what you wrote to founding fathers just before the British tried to take their guns. They put in the 2nd to protect us from the government that works for us
Granny Godzilla
January 17th, 2013
4:49 pm
pogo
January 17th, 2013
4:36 pm
It is sad that Granny Lizard actually seems to be celebrating that the republicans will have to cave on raising the debt ceiling. NONE of us should be celebrating the fact that our nation can no longer pay its bills. She just goes to show how short sighted and ideologically entrenched the liberals like her really are.
.
.
.
.
Bless your Heart
Doggone/GA
January 17th, 2013
4:50 pm
“I grew up calling them a bevy of deer, Unmentionable called them a band…”
NOTHING is better than what a group of crows is called. You’d think it would be “flock” just like any other group of birds. But nope, a group of crows is a “Murder of crows”!
Real Scootter
January 17th, 2013
4:51 pm
They’re prepackaged.
And you can get them at the Bass Pro Shopes!
josef
January 17th, 2013
4:52 pm
BROSEPHUS
Soooo that’s why we had so many of ‘em in Coosa, runnin from y’all in Alabama!
Fred ™
January 17th, 2013
4:53 pm
Great, I have an update hung up. It won’t install and it won’t cancel……..
indigo
January 17th, 2013
4:53 pm
godless heathen – 4:24
That is not what was asked.
godless heathen
January 17th, 2013
4:53 pm
oneofeach4me
January 17th, 2013
4:27 pm
@heathen ~ However you want to spin it, be my guest.
Then I’m sure you will have no problem with me determining what you have that you do not need.
moonbat betty
January 17th, 2013
4:54 pm
Fred, hadn’t seen that video – funny!
Please tell me Alabama doesn’t really make their bbq sauce from MAYO!
This is for Kamchak:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eeZhEBY8eVg
TomB
January 17th, 2013
4:54 pm
Adam says: Moderate says: “I would like to take some common sense measures to help reduce crime.”
Conservative response: “But you wouldn’t have 100% PREVENTED Sandy Hook (and only Sandy Hook, never mind all those other shootings) and if you’re not PREVENTING all crime immediately with law, then law is useless.”
The conservative position here does not make sense.
Adam, you may be the dumbest person on this blog. What if I wanted to pass some common sense measures, and in the meantime not only is our second amendment being slowly taken away, but our first amendment is also. Now our doctor is going to ask us if we own any guns and how many? Uh, Doc I just wanted you to check my prostate. I know but it’s important that I know if you have any guns in your house.
I don’t know about you Adam but this doesn’t sound like common sense to me. But, this is exactly what the damn government does when it thinks can solve a complicated problem like why someone decides to go out and commit murder of innocent people. Remember Jay said guns don’t overthrow tyranny or guarantee liberty. People do. Well guess what Adam, guns don’t kill. People do.
Peace
January 17th, 2013
4:55 pm
It gets more interesting. Buckwheat steals Johnny B.’s legally registered gun, then takes same and shoots Debbie D.R. to death. Since there were no witnesses and Buckwheat left no fingerprints, he just leaves the gun at the scene of the crime. There’s a knock at the door a while later and the authorities take poor Johnny B. to jail. He is eventually cleared but it is a lengthy and costly endeavor. Who comes out better, Johnny B. or Buckwheat? Moral: better to steal a gun and commit a crime than buy one and register it with BHO. Just thinking.
Dekalb Comments
January 17th, 2013
4:56 pm
Mr. Liberty @ 4:37
No, the reason for the 2nd Amendment has nothing to do with making sure citizens have a recourse if non-violent means of protecting liberty and freedom fail. Perhaps the reason was not covered during your civics class.
The reason for the 2nd Amendment was a protection granted in the federal constitution to citizens that states could not prohibit the ownership of arms because militia were at the time essential to the defense of the nation. There was no national army, only state militias.
No one in this debate is suggesting to take away the right of a law-abiding citizen deemed to be capable of responsible ownership and use of a firearm from posessing one (or many for that matter).
The major proposals for reasonable gun control are
- Ensuring background checks are conducted every time there is a transfer of ownership of a firearm
- Banning the sale of assault weapons for personal (as opposed to military) use
- Banning the sale of high capacity magazines
- Having a serious dialogue about mental health, responsibility of gun ownership including proper training and the security of firearms
The Supreme Court has consistently held that constitutionally-guaranteed rights are not boundless or limitless. They are all subject to reasonable regulation. Any serious, rational person can recognize that nothing is without limits even something as sacred as consitutional rights. Gun nuts, however, have come to equate ANY regulation of any kind on gun ownership as a complete destruction of the 2nd Amendment. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Free speech is guaranteed in this country but yelling “fire” in a crowded theater not for the purpose of alerting patrons of an imminent or present danger is not protected. Engaging in slanderous or libelous speech is not protected. Certain forms of “free speech” such as obscene pornography is not protected.
Doggone/GA
January 17th, 2013
4:57 pm
“Moral: better to steal a gun and commit a crime than buy one and register it with BHO”
Moral: if your gun is stolen report it IMMEDIATELY to the authorities
josef
January 17th, 2013
4:57 pm
DOGGONE
That one has always intrigued me, too…here’s what the word detective had to say about it…
“As for why we call a group of crows a “murder,” the inspiration for the term is a mystery, lost since the 15th century. As the Oxford English Dictionary suggests, “murder” may “perhaps [allude] to the crow’s traditional association with violent death, or … to its harsh and raucous cry.” Then again, since crows have recently been demonstrated to be capable of advanced reasoning and even tool-making, maybe they actually did plot a few murders back in the 15th century.”
Granny Godzilla
January 17th, 2013
4:59 pm
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/01/17/parody-nra-urges-members-to-live-in-fear/
Fred ™
January 17th, 2013
4:59 pm
And now I just found out my accountant died……….
DownInAlbany
January 17th, 2013
4:59 pm
Fred and Stands….sorry for throwing out the Gallup poll and then not sticking around to take my lumps…I actually had to work a little today!
Is it germane to the ongoing conversation? I’ll leave that up to the respective bloggers. I just found it interesting…and quite honestly, surprising. The “…uneducated, toothless…” part was me just being snarky. But, snarky is a main-stay on this blog, wouldn’t you say? If you can’t stand snarky, better find a different way to get your jollies!
Brosephus™
January 17th, 2013
5:00 pm
josef
They were not dropping by to be friendly. They were trying to save hide!!!!
Doggone/GA
January 17th, 2013
5:00 pm
Josef – I love it! There’s a show that crops up on public TV every now and then called “A Murder of Crows” and it is fascinating.
Dan Apted
January 17th, 2013
5:01 pm
Bolderdash, if and when ballots stop working and we can’t overthrow the government with them we will have only our words and our bullets to do the job. While a few individuals with small arms has no chance of defeating the US armed forces tens of millions of us co-ordinating an attack even without combat weapons becomes a significant insurrection. A well controlled militia is just as important today as a method of taking down any government as it has ever been. If you take away those small arms it becomes ever more difficult for an insurrection to be effective. I hope our ballets instead of bullets method of revolution every four years continues to work. But make no mistake about it, this former armed forces member and his former armed forces kids and neigbors knows how to use our piddling little guns to take control of and use the very effective guns, tanks and aircraft currently controlled by our military. Don’t think for a moment that you or anybody else is going to take those guns away without a very bloody mess happening.
We must maintain our ability to raise a militia as a method of avoiding an armed insurrection.
clem
January 17th, 2013
5:02 pm
paul rand is an idiot; even ronald reagan was against assault weapons back in 94 we are told
saywhat?
January 17th, 2013
5:03 pm
Alabamian deer, Georgian deer and Tennesseean deer are all different. I found out one weekend while hunting up near where the three state lines intersect. I had bagged 3 deer and was heading home when a game warden showed up. He stuck a moistened finger up the butt of the first deer, tasted his finger, and informed me it was a Georgian deer, and did I have a Georgia hunting license? Well, I did and showed it to him. He repeated the procedure with each of the other two deer, informing me they were from Alabama and Tennessee respectively, and did I have aa Alabama license and a Tennessee license. Well, I did, and I showed him, and he got a little upset. He asked me “Where are you from that you go hunting with three different deer licenses”. So I dropped my pants, bent over, and said “Why don’t you tell me?”
josef
January 17th, 2013
5:06 pm
DOGGONE
Hillbilly and I were chatting the other p.m. about crows…them’s some bada33 mofos! We’ve got a hawk here in the neighborhood and the crows will attack it and run it off…
…Remember that special on the crows and ravens and the things they’ll do just for meaness sake…
josef
January 17th, 2013
5:08 pm
BROSEPHUS
DOGGONE
Is that the show I was referring to?
Doggone/GA
January 17th, 2013
5:10 pm
“We’ve got a hawk here in the neighborhood and the crows will attack it and run it off”
They’re not the only ones though. I’ve seen birds as small as wrens drive a hawk off. They get above it and dive bomb it, in a passing run. Ever seen a hawk fly with it’s shoulders up around it’s ears? That’s what they look like as they get out of the are as fast as they can!
LiveFree
January 17th, 2013
5:10 pm
Jay….giving a 16 year old kid keys to a car is dangerous and fool-hardy as well. At what point do we look at the individual who committed the crime and hold them responsible. The 2nd amendment is straight forward. There isn’t a disclaimer at the end saying that this amendment will expire at some future date. Do I believe people should go overboard because the left is exploiting a tragedy for their own political purpose? No. You only have to look at history to see that certain tyrants got their start spouting the same rhetoric that we see from the left. Guns are not the issue. Freedom IS the issue. What is to keep the government, whether ran from the left or right, from taking other freedoms away. Let the government out law your cafe mocha latte and I bet you stain your underwear.
TomB
January 17th, 2013
5:11 pm
Uh Dekalb Comments, now it’s just obscene pornography. I’m glad you said that because there sure is a lot of pornography out there. Oh, and who decides what is obscene? Did you know they depict rape in pornography? Are you a woman? Do you think this is obscene?
For your civics class:
Alexander Hamilton(most liberal founding father) said this:
This will not only lessen the call for military establishments, but if circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, 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.
He was basically saying the citizens should be as armed as the military so there goes your asault weapon regulation.
Hamilton also said this:
“If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no resource left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government . . . The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms…”
There goes the tyranny argument.
josef
January 17th, 2013
5:12 pm
saywhat
So many lines, so little time…
DOGGONE
I never thought of it that way, but, yeah! That IS what it looks like…
Doggone/GA
January 17th, 2013
5:12 pm
“Is that the show I was referring to?”
I don’t think so, at least…I don’t remember any ravens. The one I saw was about studying urban crows and one thing they found out QUICK was that if they were going to do things like take baby crows out of the nest they had to wear masks. Because ANY crows that saw them “attack” those babies would teach all the crows in the nieghborhood who they were until that person couldn’t walk around outside without being attacked.
Fred ™
January 17th, 2013
5:13 pm
DownInAlbany: I’m sorry, I didn’t MEAN to come across snarky, I was just curious. I mean you had a reason for posting that. I was also serious about asking you where you found it.
barking frog
January 17th, 2013
5:15 pm
gun sheets….
oneofeach4me
January 17th, 2013
5:17 pm
@Heathen ~ I don’t need a military style assault rifle. Enlighten me.. please.. because your tit-for-tat is not doing it for me…
Fred ™
January 17th, 2013
5:17 pm
Dear Abby died. How sad. Her daughter has been doing her column for years, but it still sucks. In tribute (and just for you Brocephus, I think the singer/songwriter is a
hickfine feller from Alabama like you I play this song. I think it accurately sums up her advice:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2ccC4aULow
josef
January 17th, 2013
5:18 pm
DOGGONE
The one on the ravens showed them doing things like unpegging tents and going over to the side laughing. They also showed them at the golf course picking up the balls and taking them to the rough watching as the golfers got frustrated…they’ll unpin clothes from the washline…amazing…they’ll start to pull a stunt, call in their buds and do a “watch this…”
Cherokee
January 17th, 2013
5:19 pm
Sigh
Dan, no one wants to take your guns away.
Obama put out very specific proposals, none of which include requiring you even to register your guns, let alone turn them in.
But you would rather believe fantasies than the truth.
Joe Hussein Mama
January 17th, 2013
5:37 pm
td — “Just like stores have to keep records of gun sales, who bought them and the Federal background check attached to the paperwork.”
Transfers aren’t covered, though. Nor are private sales. And all the Fed gets is a registration number, which can easily be removed for those inclined to crime.
“Not buying the argument to make policing more efficient as a reason to give up my right to privacy.”
Why, exactly, is your privacy more important with respect to a firearm than it is with respect to any other sort of tangible property (e.g. car, real estate)?
“Policing would be more efficient and a great deal of crimes could be stopped before they actually happened if police could monitor or data mine all phone calls and emails.Do you want them to have this capability?”
Clearly you have never heard of the FISA Court.
Again, I ask you — how do you recommend they improve law enforcement so that firearm offenses may be more vigorously and aggressively prosecuted?
Joe Hussein Mama
January 17th, 2013
5:40 pm
MrLiberty — “The Declaration of Independence is very clear that it is the right and responsibility of people to throw off and change their government if it becomes destructive of liberty and freedom and no longer protects these rights. The Declaration of Independence is as much a part of our laws as the Constitution.”
No, it’s not.
The Declaration of Independence is a beautiful and timeless document, to be sure, but it has absolutely no force of law in this country and is not legally a precedent for any other laws.
JACKIE
January 17th, 2013
5:47 pm
IN IRAQ/AFGHANISTAN MOST OF THE IEDS THAT KILL OUR TROOPS ARE MADE OF OLD, UNEXPLODED BOMBS AND SCRAPS OF WIRING AND A CELL PHONE. BOUGHT NOTHING.
AND, HAD A BROTHER IN LAW WHO SERVED IN IRAQ EARLY ON. HE SAID AK-47S WERE AVAILABLE EVERYWHERE FOR LESS THAN $10.00. AND HE SAID THEY COULD LAY IN SAND FOR A WEEK AND STILL WORKED.
luangtom
January 17th, 2013
5:49 pm
Hey, Mr. Bookman, do you not think that ALL of the Bill of Rights are tied to each other? If we allow the Second Amendment to all and eliminate its credence, what is to say the First Amendment will not be taken away by a government that wants no dissent? You have been on the freedom-express of the press and know you would not wish to lose your ability to banter and voice your opinion about government.
The Second Amendment is a protection device of ALL of the Bill of Rights.
Jay
January 17th, 2013
5:54 pm
“The Second Amendment is a protection device of ALL of the Bill of Rights.”
No, it’s not.
I’m dubious about whether it ever performed that function, but certainly at this point in our history it is incapable of doing so. There is no conceivable way that private arms can compete with those fielded by governments.
Should a dictatorship somehow emerge, the American people would indeed have to rise up against it. But it is fantasy to think that could be done at gunpoint.
davidgmills
January 17th, 2013
6:01 pm
@ Granny
I guess that was supposed to be an ad hominem attack. You made no argument so I have no idea what you think about the topic discussed. But saying that a lawyer who has specialized in or trained in something other than constitutional law knows nothing about it what the constitution says is a bit like believing a neurosurgeon can’t diagnose the flue.
TomB
January 17th, 2013
6:06 pm
Well Jay, Alexander Hamilton said that the right of self defense is paramount to all forms of positive government. The second amendment to the constitution is all about this original right of self defense. Matter of fact the influence came from the English Bill of Rights of 1689 where the right to bear arms was a long established natural right in English law. What do you know about that…look at the Brits now and my how the mighty have fallen.
Jay
January 17th, 2013
6:12 pm
Is Britain a tyranny, TomB?
Sure, they’re not the global empire they used to be. But as a little island nation of some 60 million, that wasn’t going to last anyway.
I’m not disputing the Second Amendment’s guarantee to the right of self-protection. That’s fine with me. But this idea that it amounts to a license to foment armed rebellion is dangerous nonsense. People lose an election or two and all of a sudden they start mumbling about how their rights are being violated and they have the right to overturn the election at gunpoint.
No.
They do not.
FarTrain
January 17th, 2013
6:17 pm
Neither is the first amendment any opportunity for the POTUS, or even better, the DIC(dictator-in-chief) to usurp his powers and bypass those checks put in place so a government can be, FOR THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE. This is exactly how most dictators got their starts. Be careful, be very careful, and pay attention closely to what is going on! A very scary thought crossed my mind the other day. DO NOT be at all surprised if Michelle Obama runs for President just so BO can remain in power at the end of his term. It is not beyond the realm of possibilities, and I would not put it past them. They are indeed SHAMELESS!
TomB
January 17th, 2013
6:26 pm
No Jay it has nothing to do with one certain election. It has everything to do with our liberties as spelled out in the constitution. If the people believe that these freedoms are sufficiently abridged, say by certain legislation(Obamacare) piled upon by more legislation; if the people say enough is enough then yes they do have the right to remedy the situation.Do you think the founding fathers ever envisioned a piece of legislation like Obamacare. How many pages long is it and how much does it try to regulate our lives? Maybe you need to read another founder father, Thomas Jefferson.
Jay
January 17th, 2013
6:32 pm
“No Jay it has nothing to do with one certain election. It has everything to do with our liberties as spelled out in the constitution. If the people believe that these freedoms are sufficiently abridged, say by certain legislation(Obamacare) piled upon by more legislation; if the people say enough is enough then yes they do have the right to remedy the situation.”
No, they do not have the right to “remedy the situation.” They absolutely do not, and it borders on treason for you to suggest otherwise.
They do have the right to protest peaceably, to join a political party, to make contributions, to vote, to speak out and write, etc. They have the absolute right to try to change the direction of government as a “remedy”. But they do not have the right to veto decisions they do not like at the point of a gun.
They do not. What you describe is the destruction of democratic self-government, not the protection of democratic self-government.
godless heathen
January 17th, 2013
6:34 pm
@Heathen ~ I don’t need a military style assault rifle. Enlighten me.. please.. because your tit-for-tat is not doing it for me…
OK. IT IS NOT FOR YOU TO DECIDE WHAT I NEED,
So the new standard is that we will only be allowed to own the things that idiots say we need. Well chump, I think you own a lot of things you DON’T NEED. Comprende’?
John
January 17th, 2013
6:45 pm
“According to some, the primary purpose of the Second Amendment is to ensure that citizens have enough firepower to overthrow the federal government, should it become necessary to do so. If the government ever loses its fear of such a revolt, the theory goes, our liberty ends and tyranny begins.”
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.
It is called “propaganda” …. you know ….. “the role of media in modern warfare”. The subject of your Eugene Pulliam Fellowship. Some of the very best media creations are the Nazi Propaganda films. Big money there! Oh yea!
So, …. your job and income and healthcare benefits and retirement are so important to you and your family, …. that you would push to loose some American freedoms for the sake of “sensationalism”, “Randolph Hurst” yellow journalism. “Entertainment News”. Based on results ……
Mmmmmmhhhhh. You may prove to be useful.
But before that, lets watch some video. You know, media entertainment.
Suzanna Gratia Hupp. Such a silly little woman. Who cares what happened to her or her family?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1u0Byq5Qis&list=LLnkdXF4FISX_o5hBPT3fuwA
We care.
Australia. Such a long way away. And anyway, … who would care about their little bit of freedom. Or the loss of one of their freedoms?
http://patriotaction.net/video/video/show?id=2600775%3AVideo%3A6053317&xgs=1&xg_source=msg_share_video
We care.
“Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed….”- Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution, 1787
I do not give you permission to use this letter or any part of this letter in any manner.
I just want you to think, and pray, before you set pen to paper. The founding fathers opened the first session of congress with a 3 hour prayer. Did you know that? They often proclaimed days of fasting and prayer.
Matti
January 17th, 2013
6:50 pm
TraitorTards think they can stockpile enough fire power in their basements to tell the duly elected President of the United States of America (or any other gubmint official they don’t cotton to) to go *bleep* himself. TraitorTards are so patriotic, they hate the other nations of the world so much that they want our gubmint to have enough fire power to kill everyone on Earth ten times over. No matter how much it costs! So long as the money don’t come from them, that is. They need that money for more guns! To protect ‘em from the gubmint that protects ‘em from e’erbody else.
Makes perfect sense! (If you’re a TraitorTard).
Vast Right Wing Conspiracy (aka "Knuckle-Dragger")
January 17th, 2013
7:03 pm
One of your more “Cynthia-worthy” posts in a while, Jay. When I saw the word “treason” in the title, I assumed you were talking about the imperial viceroy. He crossed the “high crimes and misdemeanors” threshold a long time ago.
You display a stunning lack of knowledge of the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, U. S. history, and world history in general. What a surprise.
TomB
January 17th, 2013
7:05 pm
They do have the right to protest peaceably, to join a political party, to make contributions, to vote, to speak out and write, etc. They have the absolute right to try to change the direction of government as a “remedy”. But they do not have the right to veto decisions they do not like at the point of a gun.
Of course Jay the people do have the right to do all these things to change the government or in this case remedy their lack of freedoms. I think you are reading more into my words which most liberals like to do. But for you to suggest there is never a time for the people to revolt is just ludicrous. I said when the majority of the people decide that enough liberties are taken where the government becomes oppressive and the people no longer fell free then yes they can. Like I said Jay, go back and read Thomas Jefferson. Or read our own Declaration of Independence. I mean we declared independence from England because of taxation without representation. And, I can think a lot of things that happen in this country that border on treason. If the binds that hold our constitution together fail,then the country as we understand it ceases to exist.
rabbit
January 17th, 2013
7:11 pm
At your local office of probate, the applications for gun permits have increased tenfold since November. They’ve been high since Obama was elected, but now there’s a frenzy. Ammo is gone from retailers. Virtually sold out. Fear of increased cost, ownership registration, taxes on ammo – a gun dealer’s dream.
So why the rush to permit concealed carry? Nothing on the table remotely approaches a breach of the right to carry a weapon. You don’t even have to have a permit to buy a gun. All it does is eliminate the instant background check. I own a gun. Own several. No permit. Difference between the fearful applicants and me? There’s no record of my guns – not that I’d mind if there was. I don’t love guns or hate them. Just don’t live in fear.
“So don’t fear if you hear – A foreign sound to your ear – It’s alright, Ma, I’m only sighing”
B.Zimmerman
rabbit
January 17th, 2013
7:13 pm
“mind if there were”
hate those grammatical mistakes.
ProfitBGoode
January 17th, 2013
7:24 pm
Jay,
Perhaps you and your myopic ilk should have asked those Iraqi gun owners or the Mujahideen that kicked the Russians and the NATO Coalition troops out of Afghanistan if they felt the need to give-up their firearms before spewing your profound myopic ignorance.
More so, you and your demented ilk errantly assume that our Military would defend the Congress and the POTUS against us citizens. That is not and would not be the case.
Does the phrase Military coup sound familiar?
Tick-tock, tick-tock, tick-tock…; o
Uh Huh....Guns, Hot Sauce and Testosterone..YUCK!
January 17th, 2013
7:38 pm
@ProfitBGoode
January 17th, 2013
7:24 pm
Does the phrase Military coup sound familiar?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Military coup?
heeheeheeheeheeheeheeheehee
Yeah right?
You mean Military Cuckoo?
Does the phrase “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest” sound FAMILIAR?
You’re it.
Vladimir
January 17th, 2013
7:42 pm
Reading these hateful bigoted posting, I have to wonder; what happened to America? It appears that the Nazi’s have experienced a rebirth in America and have taken over the news media.
“Think of the press as a great keyboard on which the government can play.”
Joseph Goebbels
“It is the absolute right of the State to supervise the formation of public opinion.”
Joseph Goebbels
Jay
January 17th, 2013
7:45 pm
I think it’s cute how Vladimir complains about hateful, bigoted posts, right before he calls me a Nazi.
td
January 17th, 2013
7:54 pm
Jay
January 17th, 2013
5:54 pm
“The Second Amendment is a protection device of ALL of the Bill of Rights.”
No, it’s not.
I’m dubious about whether it ever performed that function, but certainly at this point in our history it is incapable of doing so. There is no conceivable way that private arms can compete with those fielded by governments.
Should a dictatorship somehow emerge, the American people would indeed have to rise up against it. But it is fantasy to think that could be done at gunpoint
So since you do not believe that 80 million armed citizens could not overthrow a tyrannical government with an army of less the 1 million (that is if the army would stay committed, break posse comitatus and fire on its own citizens) then in your mind the second Amendment is a relic and should be ignored as a fundamental right guaranteed by the Constitution?
JamVet
January 17th, 2013
7:57 pm
Kudos, Jay!
I definitely expected more than a few post election meltdowns.
But oowee! These violence addicted but impotent lunatics in the GOP are going absolutely berserk, huh>
The funniest part is that they actually think that they are on some sort of righteous crusade to save the republic from communists, Marxists and socialists. (Oh my)
But then again, these rubes actually thought that Mitt the Messiah had a snowball’s chance in h-e-double el of even competing in the aforementioned election.
I’d sure be scarce if I was the wife, children or family pet of some of these nutjobs!
td
January 17th, 2013
7:57 pm
Jay
January 17th, 2013
5:54 pm
One more point. Since the 2nd Amendment is not relevant any longer why not do the proper thing and pass a 28th Amendment to do repeal the 2nd Amendment and that way it will not appear to be the left breaking the Constitution?
Jay
January 17th, 2013
7:57 pm
“… then in your mind the second Amendment is a relic and should be ignored as a fundamental right guaranteed by the Constitution?”
Not in the least. As Scalia notes, the Second Amendment guarantees the right to personal self-defense, and continues to be very relevant in that regard.
Tony
January 17th, 2013
8:03 pm
Jay Bookman, evidently by your column, you are not much more than a coward. It’s a good thing for the Egyptians, the Libyans and at the present, the Syrian people, that they don’t read your Column. I mean they stood absolutely no chance of overthrowing their repressive regimes. With all due respect mr Bookman. I think we should keep our guns. You know. Just in case you’re wrong. By the way. What makes you think that some of those military people won’t join up with the people and even bring some of those weapons that has you so terrified if it was to ever come to that?
Keith
January 17th, 2013
8:18 pm
had bookman and these obamabots been around during the revolution they would have been marching with the Brits on the way to confiscation of the patriots arms. We would still be under the Union Jack. They have no understanding of what American stands for. Heres a clue: FREEDOM. Not bans, regulations, confiscations etc.
Keith
January 17th, 2013
8:27 pm
Not in the least. As Scalia notes, the Second Amendment guarantees the right to personal self-defense, and continues to be very relevant in that regard.
And so-called assault weapons were used to to good effect during the LA riots. They were also used by the LAPD during hte BOA robbery. Good thing those stores had those AR-15s for the cops to get. I hope the gun and ammo companies begin to boycott cities and states that are trying to put them out of business. They should refuse to sell to cops in those areas. Let them do their jobs unarmed.
Keith
January 17th, 2013
8:36 pm
No, they do not have the right to “remedy the situation.” They absolutely do not, and it borders on treason for you to suggest otherwise.
They do have the right to protest peaceably, to join a political party, to make contributions, to vote, to speak out and write, etc. They have the absolute right to try to change the direction of government as a “remedy”. But they do not have the right to veto decisions they do not like at the point of a gun.
They do not. What you describe is the destruction of democratic self-government, not the protection of democratic self-government.
You miss the point. When the govt removes our rights we lose the right to protest peaceably, to join political parties unless its the one in control etc.
Wouldnt it have been nice if the German citizenry had taken up arms against the Nazis when they were eliminating thje opposition. But according to Bookman we should do as they did. NOTHING. Should we expect a different outcome?
mrdbj
January 17th, 2013
8:49 pm
Jay, you are so full of yourself. Please, go BACK to college you arrogant libtard. As recently as SYRIA, have “the people” fought a tyrannical government with rifles. Even Scott Pelley of CBS exclaimed on CBS evening news that he couldn’t believe they’ve come so far “with rifles!”. Why don’t you start by reading the Federalist papers and lot of other supporting documentation as to what the 2nd Amendment is for. Good grief. VIETNAM beat us the same way. Not with sophistication or head to head, but with guerrilla warfare. Here’s another tidbit of info: NO society as every survived time, NONE, EVER. Don’t think our relatively new democracy is perfect and won’t fall apart. Modern governments fold up every year. How do you know we’re not next? Geez.
dabir dalton
January 17th, 2013
8:59 pm
The supreme court doesn’t always get it right it’s rulings on slavery and it’s declaring corporations to be persons are but two examples. Our Govt. is supposed to rule by the consent of the people however a disarmed people facing a fully armed Govt. can not reasonably give consent simply because the Govt. has the power to overwhelm not just the individual but the entire population as well in order to impose its will. Just as a female employee is unable to consent to a sexual relationship with her boss because of the imbalance of power.
dabir dalton
January 17th, 2013
9:10 pm
Jay wrote: No, they do not have the right to “remedy the situation.” They absolutely do not, and it borders on treason for you to suggest otherwise.
_______________________
Jay not only are you dead wrong you are lying. The founding fathers of our country believed in the right of the people to overthrow a govt. abusing its power and considered it a duty for the governed to overthrow tyranny. The southern states had the constitutional right to succeed from the union just as the states have the right to succeed from the union today.
Vladimir
January 17th, 2013
9:19 pm
Dr. Susan Gratia before House subcommittee on guns. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=awjxvMRdF-U
Gun Control in Australia – Watch and Weep
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGaDAThOHhA
When a country takes away guns from its citizens it’s in big trouble as they are finding out in Australia.
Garden Diva
January 17th, 2013
10:16 pm
Robert
January 17th, 2013
2:30 pm
Umm, actually it is still acceptable to say “My gun is none of your business”. You have no more right to know if I have a gun or how many or what kind than to know if my appliances are gas or electric and etc.
As for disarming me or anyone else, don’t be surprised if you are assumed to be a whacko or criminal and summarily dispatched in one way or another because, yes Robert, it is my right and my responsibility to protect myself, my family, and my property. We are not acting “childish” or “cowardly”. We are, in fact, being realistic in acknowledging that the world in which we live is not utopian, that there are people who will try to do bad things to you, sometimes just for fun, in spite of the fact that those bad things are against the law, and that law enforcement may not get to you in time to prevent it.
And I, personally, am tired of the name-calling and generalizations ON BOTH SIDES. The name-calling and patronizing seem to be knee jerk reactions. Antipathy and disdain for anyone with an opinion counter to your own is arrogant and moronic within itself. So please grow up and learn to discuss issues in a reasonable manner. That is what adults do.
TomB
January 17th, 2013
10:32 pm
I’m not disputing the Second Amendment’s guarantee to the right of self-protection. That’s fine with me. But this idea that it amounts to a license to foment armed rebellion is dangerous nonsense.
So let me get this right, Jay. You’re not disputing the Second Amendment’s guarantee of self-protection, but you apparently believe that this right would never lead to state of rebellion. How nice. I bet the Jews in 1930’s Germany also thought the same way as you. Wrong. If history teaches us anything it is that our world can change literally over night.Why do you think this right of self-protection was put in the constitution by the founders to begin with? Did you think they were worried about being robbed? Good grief.
Joel Edge
January 18th, 2013
5:54 am
“If you want to rejuvate that aspect of the Second Amendment, you have to be willing to grant private citizens access to fully automatic weapons, Stinger anti-aircraft missiles, grenade launchers, etc. And it’s not going to happen.”
There’s a little problem with that, Mr. Bookman. Going with your scenario. The various other weapons would come later. By seizure or by being turned over by sympathetic government forces. We’d wind up with a country like many, government forces holding urban areas and the rest of the country in armed revolt. It happened in Vietnam is happening in Afghanistan now. We had the 1st Armored, elements of the 4th ID, and Apache air cover in Iraq. Those mortars and rockets came in like clockwork. You remember, it’s one of the examples you liberals like to make against the war in Afghanistan and places like that.
‘You can’t subjugate people that don’t want to be subjugated’ kind of thing.
Jonmaguire22
January 18th, 2013
6:20 am
Jay, please read the federalist papers. Especially 46.
1) you are right about access to guns
2) if the citizens did not have weapons would a government (any government) feel accountable to its citizens?
3) on the same point, our citizens have guns and our government is only slightly accountable. How much less if citizens depended wholly on the government for protection?
bookman parrot
January 18th, 2013
7:54 am
being elected is not a reason for treason either, sir jay. bypassing constitutional rules is treason.
southpaw
January 18th, 2013
8:10 am
Reality
January 17th, 2013
2:56 pm
@Southpaw and Aser706,
Because you don’t like the definitions given by Websters International Dictionary you attack me?
—————————–
Are you kidding? Who said I have anything against the definitions? I suggested you compare a few of them. And I didn’t attack you.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/attack?s=t
BLK09GT
January 18th, 2013
9:16 am
Russ @ 2:20 & 2:31 PM Kudos, I see that no one has mentioned your comment. Facts must confuse them. Jay’s article is based on quotes taken out of context.
Adam
January 18th, 2013
9:38 am
Morality: Afghanistan needed hand held rocket launchers or the USSR would have probably taken them over.
Afghanistan and the USSR were countries with armies fighting each other, not an example of the U.S. government terrorizing its own people, which is what I was referring to. False analogy on your part.
If our own military won’t turn its weapons on the general populace at the order of a tyrant, then there is no need to have private armed citizens to fight against our own government. If, however, you think the military WOULD do this, then there is still no need for private arms because we are all dead anyway.
Adam
January 18th, 2013
9:39 am
godless: I think it will require more specific information than that about what the governments intentions are with the registry of guns that many are advocating, in order to convince gun owners that it’s not about either confiscation or taxation.
As well as NOT having a campaign from the NRA trying to convince everyone that Obama is a tyrant and dictator for doing damn near exactly what Reagan did.
I can see a scenario where a criminal shoots someone and throws down the gun and runs away, and the recovery of the gun leads to an arrest through ownership tracking, but I would think that is not as common as we see on TV. Most likely the criminal has obtained the gun illegally and it would not be associated with him/her through any registration process.
And therefore we should have the registration system. Over time even illegally obtained guns will have been in the system at some point, and would make it easier to figure out where the gun came from.
But I do watch Law and Order and they are all the time zeroing in on the citizen that has a registered gun. Of course if it’s their first suspect, it’s always the wrong one.
Exactly. The people in the legal system are smart enough not to hold a person responsible for a crime because the gun is registered to them. They still have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the owner committed the crime. For the most part, law enforcement will not waste their time for very long on someone who obviously did not commit a crime, but they still have to look at the person who last owned the gun according to the system, just as the first suspect in a murder is the spouse. But you don’t hear spouse’s being brought up on charges all the time every time the person who was murdered just happened to be married.