So what is essential liberty? Oxford defines liberty as “The state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one’s way of life, behavior, or political views. b: The state of not being imprisoned or enslaved. c: A right or privilege, especially a statutory one. d: The power or scope to act as one pleases. I used that definition because I stopped being a fan of Webster’s definitions after they stated changing long accepted definitions to reflect the current PC run amok climate.
That said, to define essential liberty, we need to dig deeper. Perhaps the best explanation of essential liberty was made by Samuel Adams: “[T]he People alone have an incontestable, unalienable, and indefeasible right to institute government and to reform, alter, or totally change the same when their protection, safety, prosperity, and happiness require it.” This statement was made in reference to amending the constitution and the method by which such amendments are adopted.
I’ve written about this quite a bit over the years, but I’ve come to the conclusion that we must revisit it to make sure that we hammer home the rationale for the existence of the 2nd amendment and why it is still and perhaps even more relevant and necessary today. The media would have us believe that there is an epidemic of mass shootings and that the problem is with guns; inanimate objects that have no ability to act on their own, rather than the perpetrators of the crimes. They stoke the fear of guns and portray the objects as evil. By extension, they see anyone who owns these objects and use them as a means protecting themselves and their families as evil.
During a recent discussion about gun control with someone whom I have known for a long time, it was expressed to me that no one needs any type of gun and “if it’s your time, it’s your time and you can’t fight that shit.” I refuse to accept such a preposterous notion. Tell that to the families of the victims of the shooting at…pick one. Up tp that point, I assumed this person was smarter than that. Every one of us has the God given right to protect ourselves, by whatever means we deem appropriate. If you choose to wait 10 minutes for the police to come – with their guns – to save you, that is your choice, but I will not allow you to deprive me of my right to defend myself and my family against a threat.
For years they have been feeding us the line that they don’t want to take our guns away. They said that no one is coming for our guns. Those of us who have been paying attention knew they were lying. In the wake of the most recent mass shootings that have taken place in schools, they are now willing to admit that they do in fact want to ban guns. Most, if not all of the anti-constitutionalists are so uneducated on the subject that they didn’t realize the words they were using to describe the guns they wanted to ban would in effect ban all guns. When presented with that fact, many of them finally admitted that banning them all would be acceptable. Now that they have admitted that, the next step is to stop telling us that people who value their freedom and their natural right to self protection are evil child murderers. Maybe then we can have an honest discussion about what should be done to prevent these tragedies from happening. Here’s a hint, it’s not passing more restrictive laws.
The founding fathers fought a long bloody war to achieve independence from an oppressive regime. As a result, they were determined to design a form of government that could preserve said independence. They also recognized that if we weren’t careful, it could all slip away. Despite what the leftist media tells us, the second amendment was not intended for the militia or people using muskets.
“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”
The constitution is not ambiguous. The founders were very clear about their intent with respect to arms and the natural right to self protection. They knew from experience when the constitution was being written and debated that disarming the people was a means of control. They understood that an armed populace was a check on the power of the ruling class. The first shots fired in the war for independence were the result of an attempt by the British army to confiscate the guns of the people. Contrary to what seems to be the prevailing opinion, natural rights are not granted by man or government, therefor can not be taken away by either.
Richard Henry Lee said “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.” The amount of time and energy they spent on debating the second amendment speaks to just how important they believed this was to preserving the republic they were building. The Federalist Papers, debate transcripts and other writings by the founders all serve to illustrate this point. I submit that the right to self protection and preservation affirmed by the second amendment is in fact THE essential liberty. This guarantees the freedom of the people to be armed and fight against a tyrannical government bent on subjugating its citizens.
“A government, resting on a minority is an aristocracy, not a Republic, and could not be safe with a numerical and physical force against it, without a standing army, an enslaved press, and a disarmed populace.” The Clintons, the Bushes, senators and representatives serving in office for 20 to 30 years and longer in some cases, all serve to make this statement by James Madison extraordinarily prescient. The media is demonstrably a propaganda arm of the marxist left. They called for people like Michelle Obama and Chelsea Clinton to jump in to the political fray and attempt to set up an even more dynastic ruling class. That set of facts, along with the left’s campaign to revoke the second amendment should be a call to action for all supporters of the second amendment to mobilize and step up our efforts to preserve that essential liberty and make sure that it is never again infringed.