The Bill of Rights should speak for itself. Our founding fathers made sure they guaranteed inalienable, God given rights in the Constitution. The civil right to keep and bear firearms was listed second in the list of ten.
Academia and the media are the primary force in the liberalization of America, including repealing the Second Amendment. The Obamanation is using the education system, the media and now the United Nations in an attempt to deny an inalienable civil right.
Where’s the outrage? Written below is the position of the President of the United States and the Progressive Party, aka Democrats, on the Second Amendment. Today their spokes person to re-write the Constitution is Professor Price of the University of Kentucky College of Law.
Melynda Price joined the UK College of Law as an Assistant Professor in the fall of 2006. Professor Price completed a doctorate degree in Political Science from the University of Michigan in 2006. Her dissertation was awarded the 2007 Best Dissertation Award from the Race, Ethnicity and Politics Section of the American Political Science Association. In addition to her degree in political science, she also earned a J.D. from the University of Texas School of Law in 2002. While at the University of Texas, she was a member of the Texas International Law Journal and was awarded both the University of Texas Coop Award for Public Interest Law and the Baron and Budd Scholarship for Public Interest Law. She completed her undergraduate studies in Physics at Prairie View A&M University in 1995.
The Sunday Edition of the New York Times published the following suggestion for re-writing the Constitution on the Opinion Page on July 8, 2012.
Get Rid of the Right to Bear Arms
I came of age when the word “drive-by” entered the American lexicon. By high school graduation, I lost one cousin to gun violence and another was incarcerated for a gun crime. I know many harmed by guns and even more who feared the possibility. I always wonder if, but for the Second Amendment, there would be a more radical commitment to compromise and peacefully working through easy and difficult issues.
The process of compromise is exactly what the Framers were engaged in and is exactly what seems absent today. What if terms like “black-on-black crime” were instead “black-on-black reconciliation” or “black-on-black-let’s-talk-this-out-like-the-human-beings-we-have-always-known-ourselves-to-be.”
I am not naïve enough to believe that doing away with the Second Amendment would do away with gun violence, but I know firsthand the impact of guns and gun shots on children. This nation was constructed and reconstructed in the aftermath of violent and bloody conflicts. Still, the Framers believed that not only the Constitution, but also the peaceful way the document was created, would penetrate the Americans’ minds and change they engaged. The Constitution would be the only weapon needed unless there was an external enemy.
Despite the Supreme Court’s repetition of outdated mythologies of kings and castles in Heller v. District of Columbia, I am not sure this amendment envisioned the kind of gun toting that is permitted across this country in the last decade. The Second Amendment acknowledged the vulnerability of a nation in its infancy, but could not predict a world where some would move through life feeling more like targets than citizens. Now a mother watching her own fragile creation grow into black manhood, I would worry less if it were more difficult for him to find himself facing a gun held by boys or men who look like him or by those whose job it is to serve and protect.
There is so much wrong with this, where do I start?
The Second Amendment and the Bill of Rights was written: “in order to prevent the misconstruction or abuse of its (government’s) power.” First, we must consider if the federal government was given any authority with regard to the people bearing arms. As I examine it, there is no mention in the Constitution giving the federal government the authority to restrict the people from owning or bearing arms.
When the Founding Fathers included the Second Amendment to the Bill of Rights, they wanted to make sure there would be no “misconstruction or abuse of its powers” with regard to bearing arms,,,,
Though the authority to regulate arms was not given to the federal government, our forefathers still wanted to ensure the federal government would not misconstruct (misconstrue or misunderstand in modern words) the statement, “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
Besides the fact that the Second Amendment gives the people the right to bear arms, that right is supported by the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, which basically determine that any rights not specifically given to the federal government in the articles of the Constitution are reserved to the state and the people.*
Only Tyrants keep the right to bear arms from a free people, using gang activity as an example for infringing on the rights of free honest people is not a well thought out position.
When attempting to convince fellow law-abiding citizens to give up a right written out in the Constitution and affirmed by the Supreme court, one should attempt to do better than claim the right is outdated. Price’s call for ridding the Constitution of the Second Amendment was published in the NY Times, the primary voice of liberal elitism in America.
How can someone pass a state bar exam and be this ignorant? Price, a college professor at a major univeristy law school, is intentionally ignoring the truth, the primary trait of the left. Bullshit anecdotes don’t make legitimate arguments. Nobody with a sixth grade education should take Price seriously. Yet the NY Times does. This tells you everything you need to know about he Obamanation. Obama seeks to destroy liberty and freedom in America. Tyranny is his mission. You’re not a wing-nut if you believe that. You’re either a moron or a subversive if you don’t believe it.
Here’s what Price should have learned in the sixth grade.
Owning a firearm is a right that was recognized by the founders as they had seen historically what happens when the people are unarmed and their rulers weren’t. The 2nd amendment is an insurance policy for the other amendments within the Constitution. It is what gives we the people the final voice when our government decides to ignore the will of the people.
“That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, —That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”
Wake up America!