Citizen or Subject

[TGO David]

I found this elsewhere and am posting it here because it really resonated with me...

An Armed Person is a Citizen; An Unarmed Person is a Subject

by Jon Pananas at 6:40 PM

Contrary to the belief of many of our fellow citizens, the purpose of the United States Constitution is not to grant us rights. Our rights, given to us by our Creator, are inalienable. The purpose of the Constitution is to limit the powers of the federal government. Look at the language of the Bill of Rights. It is chock full of “shall not” and “shall make no;” all of which refer to the United States government.

Our explicit rights, that is, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are contingent wholly upon our implicit right: the right of the people to keep and bear arms. The intent of the Second Amendment is to preserve and guarantee, not grant, a pre-existing right; again, the right of the people to keep and bear arms.

Arms, by which we mean guns, allow the free citizen to exercise self-defense; to protect one’s self from predators of various stripes, be they criminal malefactors or rapacious government. St. George Tucker—Revolutionary War officer and later U.S. District Judge—in his Blackstone’s Commentaries of 1803 wrote that “the right of self-defense is the first law of nature.”

The Fourth Amendment—“The right of the people to be secure in their person, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizure, shall not be violated”—would be hollow prose without the Second Amendment to give it teeth. This concept was recognized very early by the Framers. Noah Webster wrote in 1787,

“Before any standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom of 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 that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States…[The people] will instantly inspire the inclination to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive.”

This sentiment was expressed best, perhaps, by one of Virginia’s favorite sons. In 1788, Patrick Henry wrote, “Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches this jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined.”

Certainly guns have enormous recreational uses and add hugely to the sporting life of our people. But the intent of the Framers was not to safeguard the rights of target shooters and duck hunters. It was to preserve our freedoms from an aggressive government. Keep in mind that the Framers were insurrectionists. They were well acquainted with the realities of oppressive rule and were determined to give the citizens of this republic the tools necessary to preserve and protect their freedoms.

The Constitution is a document of unique concepts and principles. But it will provide the framework for the Rule of Law in this country only so long as we remain an armed citizenry and do not allow ourselves to become unarmed serfs.

[Guest pherman926]

Great post!

[Guest GlocKingTN]

Great post!

I agree! For everyone to read!

[saintsfanbrian]

Come on now, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights are "living" documents. You can't expect them to mean the same thing today as they did back when the founders and framers of this nation wrote them. After all, words meanings change, and the people have changed too. It is time for our nation to become one with the rest of the world. The whole New World Order where everyone can live in peace if we just give up the right to defend ourselves. The world will be much happier if the average citizen doesn't have the ability to over throw the government.

[/sarcasm]

Seriously though, does it not seem to anyone else that the original framers/founders never really intended on the standing army being able to "oppress" the people? Today, we use the standing army/national gaurd as a police force against our own citizens though usually only when desperate times call for desperate measures - Think Post Katrina, The Memphis police strike etc.

[TGO David]

Seriously though, does it not seem to anyone else that the original framers/founders never really intended on the standing army being able to "oppress" the people? Today, we use the standing army/national gaurd as a police force against our own citizens though usually only when desperate times call for desperate measures - Think Post Katrina, The Memphis police strike etc.

I suspect many of this nation's framing fathers have rolled in their graves countless times over the way our government has abused it's authority since their day and age.

[Guest GlocKingTN]

I suspect many of this nation's framing fathers have rolled in their graves countless times over the way our government has abused it's authority since their day and age.

I agree totally Tungsten! The people now have taken the way it is supposed to be and made it(everything) the way they want it.

[Mike]

Great post, David!

[towerclimber37]

Its my belief that the framers of the constitution realized that laws as a whole, were a finite attempt by people, to define an infinite set of circumstances. Knowing this, they designed the original Constitution to be a loose set of guidelines that allow us to live together in relative peace and freedom, PROVIDING we protect the freedoms outlined in that document.

Tungsten, man..they got it right when they made the Constitution...it took them 13 years to write it. the insights that great men have put to paper regarding freedom are a comfort to those of us (and I'm sure this includes a heck of a lot of you guys) who have sacrificed and or lost something in the pursuit of these freedoms and who have seen peoples who have been deprived of them as well.

thanks for the great posts..you provide me with the most thought provoking material!

[Guest Len]

Bump. Excellent, thoughtful post.

Its my belief that the framers of the constitution realized that laws as a whole, were a finite attempt by people, to define an infinite set of circumstances. Knowing this, they designed the original Constitution to be a loose set of guidelines that allow us to live together in relative peace and freedom, PROVIDING we protect the freedoms outlined in that document.

Tungsten, man..they got it right when they made the Constitution...it took them 13 years to write it. the insights that great men have put to paper regarding freedom are a comfort to those of us (and I'm sure this includes a heck of a lot of you guys) who have sacrificed and or lost something in the pursuit of these freedoms and who have seen peoples who have been deprived of them as well.

thanks for the great posts..you provide me with the most thought provoking material!

[Guest db99wj]

Yep X2.

[Marswolf]

Only thing I'd disagree with is that, "The purpose of the Constitution is to limit the powers of the federal government."

The Constitution is supposed to set forward things that the government is allowed to do, not set rules that it is not allowed to do. This was why James Madison opposed the Bill of Rights in a letter to Jefferson. Madison eventually went along with the BoR rather than go through another Constitutional Convention, but it opened a confusing can of worms that we have lived with ever since.

[Guest GlocKingTN]

And it's only gonna get worse(for some)! IMHO

[Guest jackdog]

Tungsten Great post.

Jackdog

[Guest ProguninTN]

Only thing I'd disagree with is that, "The purpose of the Constitution is to limit the powers of the federal government."

The Constitution is supposed to set forward things that the government is allowed to do, not set rules that it is not allowed to do. This was why James Madison opposed the Bill of Rights in a letter to Jefferson. Madison eventually went along with the BoR rather than go through another Constitutional Convention, but it opened a confusing can of worms that we have lived with ever since.

I concur. Either way, the founders were tired of being oppressed by the King, so they wanted a new government which would be kept under control.