Montana officials are warning that if the Supreme Court rules in the D.C. gun ban case that the right to keep and bear arms protects only state-run militias like the National Guard, then the federal government will have breached Montana's statehood contract.
Nobody is raising flags for the Republic of Montana, but nobody is kidding, either. So far, 39 elected Montana officials have signed a resolution declaring that a court ruling of the Second Amendment is a right of states and not of individuals would violate Montana's compact.
"The U.S. would do well to keep its contractual promise to the states that the Second Amendment secures an individual right now as it did upon execution of the statehood contract," Montana Secretary of State Brad Johnson said in a Feb. 15 letter to The Washington Times.
Let's talk about gun rights for a moment shall we? We all know it's a subject that's near and dear to my heart.
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.
That's it. That's all there is to it. Some people, I like to call them idiots, seem to think that this allows only for "well regulated militias" to own firearms, and that it is not a right of individuals.
However, if you read the entire line, you'll see that the "well regulated militia" is provided as an EXAMPLE of why "the right of the people to keep and bear arms" shall not be infringes.
Yet, here we are, 230+ years later, arguing about the rights of individuals to own firearms.
Why?
A lot of people see gun violence and want to do something to about it, a noble cause. However, they seem to have it in their heads that if you simply get rid of the guns, you get rid of the gun violence. The problem is, is that it doesn't work that way. Get rid of guns, and you'll have a knife problem. Yet, you hear nothing about people wanting to sue the Ginsu people.
Going after the criminals for their violence involving guns is the correct way to go, but yet, Gun Control folks don't want to do that. Why not? It's easy enough to get legislation passed that says if you use a firearm in the commission of a crime, you get X amount of time added to your sentence.
Problem solved, and you get the added bonus of not infringing on the Constitutional rights of others.
This is the only Constitutional right that people argue about. Can you imagine the firestorm that would erupt if there were groups out there that lobbied to get laws passed, and SUCCEEDED asking for people's right to free speech or freedom of religion to be scaled back, or even revoked?
It would be on the front page of CNN for months. The politicians who supported it would have news cameras on their front lawns, and people would be damned near grabbing pitchforks.
But yet, no one seems to see the hypocrisy of Gun Control groups.
Here's a rough draft of the Second Amendment that was read aloud on August 17, 1789 that everyone should take notice of:
"A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, being the best security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; but no person religiously scrupulous shall be compelled to bear arms."
That provides the basic meaning of the Second Amendment. It boils down to, if you want to keep and bear arms, you may do so. It is ALSO your right NOT to do so.
That's what Gun Control groups have failed to do. They have failed to persuade people not to get guns if they don't want them. They want to push their view of things onto others who are exercising their Constitutional rights.
It's the same thing when you turn on the radio. If you find what the person is saying on there offensive, turn it off, or turn it to another station. You have no right to get that person thrown off the air because others are enjoying the program.
It's a basic, core value of Republicans: Less government. If you have lesser government involvement in people's lives, you cannot tell them that they can't own firearms.
Yet, liberals typically want freedom from government involvement in their lives as well, unless it comes to doling out nanny state checks and gun control.
That's not sticking to your beliefs, that's hypocrisy.
Travis
No comments:
Post a Comment