testtest

Some Things Never Change: What the Second Amendment Says and What it Actually Means

Another excellent post Anni. If anyone still has any doubt about the meaning of the 2nd Amendment they should read the following comments of our founding fathers in support of armed citizenry. I saw this on another site and send these quotes to my Democratic Congresswoman and Senators about once a month. Please feel free to do the same.

"A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined..."
- George Washington, First Annual Address, to both House of Congress, January 8, 1790

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms."
- Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Constitution, Draft 1, 1776

"I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery."
- Thomas Jefferson, letter to James Madison, January 30, 1787

"What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms."
- Thomas Jefferson, letter to James Madison, December 20, 1787

"The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
- Thomas Jefferson, Commonplace Book (quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria), 1774-1776

"A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball, and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be your constant companion of your walks." - Thomas Jefferson, letter to Peter Carr, August 19, 1785

"The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed."
- Thomas Jefferson, letter to to John Cartwright, 5 June 1824

"On every occasion [of Constitutional interpretation] let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying [to force] what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, [instead let us] conform to the probable one in which it was passed."
- Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Johnson, 12 June 1823

"I enclose you a list of the killed, wounded, and captives of the enemy from the commencement of hostilities at Lexington in April, 1775, until November, 1777, since which there has been no event of any consequence ... I think that upon the whole it has been about one half the number lost by them, in some instances more, but in others less. This difference is ascribed to our superiority in taking aim when we fire; every soldier in our army having been intimate with his gun from his infancy."
- Thomas Jefferson, letter to Giovanni Fabbroni, June 8, 1778

“They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
- Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759

"To disarm the people...s the most effectual way to enslave them."
- George Mason, referencing advice given to the British Parliament by Pennsylvania governor Sir William Keith, The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adooption of the Federal Constitution, June 14, 1788

"I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers."
- George Mason, Address to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 4, 1788

"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every country in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops."
- Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution, October 10, 1787

"Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of."
- James Madison, Federalist No. 46, January 29, 1788

"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country."
- James Madison, I Annals of Congress 434, June 8, 1789

"...the ultimate authority, wherever the derivative may be found, resides in the people alone..."
- James Madison, Federalist No. 46, January 29, 1788

"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
- William Pitt (the Younger), Speech in the House of Commons, November 18, 1783

“A militia when properly formed are in fact the people themselves…and include, according to the past and general usuage of the states, all men capable of bearing arms… "To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them."
- Richard Henry Lee, Federal Farmer No. 18, January 25, 1788

"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined.... The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun."
- Patrick Henry, Speech to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 5, 1778

"This may be considered as the true palladium of liberty.... The right of self defense is the first law of nature: in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest limits possible. Wherever standing armies are kept up, and 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."
- St. George Tucker, Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England, 1803

"The supposed quietude of a good man allures the ruffian; while on the other hand, arms, like law, discourage and keep the invader and the plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. The balance ofpower is the scale of peace. The same balance would be preserved were all the world destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay them aside. And while a single nation refuses to lay them down, it is proper that all should keep them up. Horrid mischief would ensue were one-half the world deprived of the use of them; for while avarice and ambition have a place in the heart of man, the weak will become a prey to the strong. The history of every age and nation establishes these truths, and facts need but little arguments when they prove themselves."
- Thomas Paine, "Thoughts on Defensive War" in Pennsylvania Magazine, July 1775

"The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms."
- Samuel Adams, Massachusetts Ratifying Convention, 1788

"The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them."
- Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States, 1833

"What, Sir, is the use of a militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty .... Whenever Governments mean to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise an army upon their ruins."
- Rep. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts, I Annals of Congress 750, August 17, 1789

"For it is a truth, which the experience of ages has attested, that the people are always most in danger when the means of injuring their rights are in the possession of those of whom they entertain the least suspicion."
- Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 25, December 21, 1787

"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, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers, may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual state. In a single state, if the persons intrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair."
- Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 28

"As civil rulers, not having their duty to the people before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as the military forces which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirmed by the article in their right to keep and bear their private arms."
- Tench Coxe, Philadelphia Federal Gazette, June 18, 1789
 
Some say the Constitution is a "living document", therefore should be interpreted according to which ever way the political winds blow. In doing so they really don't believe in the Constitution, and/or ignorant of it's real meaning.

And, those politicians/govt employees that think it's a living document and take/have taken the oath of office are instantly lying when they raise their hand, knowing that they don't believe in the original intent of the Constitution.

The original intent of the Founders is well-documented, and clear as a bell.
 
Last edited:
Here is another good article on what the 2nd amendment actually means, I think some in DC needs to read this and learn....

some-things-never-change-what-the-second-amendment-says-and-what-it-actually-means
Thanks for the article Anni,
Am thinking many people ought to teach and study our history and foundations more thoroughly.
As far as interpretations go? The wording of our Constitution and our Amendments is very clear and concise. To read something else into those simple but very powerful words which is not written is contrary to their meaning. If wrongful distorted spoken or written words displayed by some of our leaders and is believed by leaders, then they are not true leaders? How can any leader actually lead anything if they themselves don't believe in our foundations or their people?....

Recusant's post verifies and substantiates the intentions of meanings by some of those very people who helped create those important documents. Then, if those words are misunderstood and misapplied now after studying our history? History and English understanding seem to be taught poorly if those simple words are not understood and believed by every single citizen of this country? Why is that misunderstanding there? Our countries foundation, heritage and history isn't important to those who supposedly teach it? So much for the present educational system if something of that magnitude and importance is lacking?
 
I once read somewhere, before I actually read it the first time, the Bible is not supposed to be cryptic or have meanings the average reader can't understand. It is plain language for everyone to understand. After I completed my first read (with a good dictionary) I agreed wholeheartedly with that estimation.
The King James version was commissioned specifically to translate the Greek, Aramaic, and Hebrew into what was then plain English.

The writers of the Constitution were well versed in English as well as Latin and other languages.
They had vast experience with the English barristers and lords of the day twisting the meanings and intent of words.
They were not trying to be ambiguous in their language and tried extremely hard to be clear and concise.
There were arguments that extended for days over the choice of a few words.
It is only in "modern" times with the advent of the common scholastic degree that we see idiotic interpretations of language that was quite simple and clear in the day it was written.
In every case, the folks trying to change the meanings of the original language are the same ones who took the once clear meaning of "gay" to the now bastardized meaning it represents today.
It is all about power over the citizenry and control of said citizens.
 
The King James Bible was not the first translation in English. And it differs not insignificantly from the original ( Hebrew) and the first translation from Hebrew ( Greek). The King James Version was designed to control people and solidify King James’ power.
 
The King James Bible was not the first translation in English. And it differs not insignificantly from the original ( Hebrew) and the first translation from Hebrew ( Greek). The King James Version was designed to control people and solidify King James’ power.
I appreciate your position; however, the scholars that were collected to review thirds of the scripture over a period of almost a decade were assigned the job of making a translation, retaining the closest meaning and spirit of the Word, into English. Not my description but what is written in the front of my wife's grandfather's Bible.
As far as I am aware, the only purposeful substitution was in the Commandment that prohibits "killing". The original translation is "murder".
He (King James) was trying to end two hundred years of civil war and was willing to do just about anything to end the slaughter.
We know better now.

Thanks for the input!
I.
 
One thing to consider. The scholars who did the KJ revision were living in 1611 or so. Personally I am not convinced James had the best interest of the faithful at heart when he commanded the revision.

There are more discrepancies. Off the top of my head one glaring example is the translation of the word “ Shiel”. Certain denominations have been using that one to scare the hell out of children and the gullible for over 4 centuries now.
 
While Martin Luther printed/translated the first Bible intended for widespread reading by the common folk (German), his work was based on the Catholic version of scripture.
The King James version was not only the first English translation meant for the average Joe and Jane but was based on a Protestant view of the world.
Another major consideration was the elimination of the apparent contradictions seen in some of the texts circulating at the time. They wanted a cohesive collection of works in order to minimize the constant squabbling among Scriptural scholars.
 
Back
Top