Author Topic: The right to keep and bear arms, our Founders' documented intentions  (Read 7475 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline johnwk

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 94
The Second Amendment, w
hile it notes a militia is necessary to the security of a free State, the only guarantee mentioned in the Second Amendment is ". . . the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."  This is an established right which preceded the birth of our existing Constitution! 


The simple truth is, after creating our federal Constitution which became effective in 1789,  ten amendments were quickly adopted [1791] which were intentionally designed “to prevent misconstruction or abuse of “ the new government’s “powers“, and is so stated in the Resolution of the First Congress Submitting Twelve Amendments to the Constitution; March 4, 1789

THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added .


Now, in regard to fundamental rights and protections of these rights within the various state borders, let us take a look at what the people, for example, of the State of Pennsylvania, agree upon before our federal government was even created, and did so in their State’s fundamental law otherwise known as Pennsylvania’s Declaration of Rights, adopted in 1776.


I. That all men are born equally free and independent, and have certain natural, inherent and inalienable rights, amongst which are, the enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety.
 
II. That all men have a natural and unalienable right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own consciences and understanding: And that no man ought or of right can be compelled to attend any religious worship, or erect or support any place of worship, or maintain any ministry, contrary to, or against, his own free will and consent: Nor can any man, who acknowledges the being of a God, be justly deprived or abridged of any civil right as a citizen, on account of his religious sentiments or peculiar mode of religious worship: And that no authority can or ought to be vested in, or assumed by any power whatever, that shall in any case interfere with, or in any manner controul, the right of conscience in the free exercise of religious worship.

III. That the people of this State have the sole, exclusive and inherent right of governing and regulating the internal police of the same.

IV. That all power being originally inherent in, and consequently derived from, the people; therefore all officers of government, whether legislative or executive, are their trustees and servants, and at all times accountable to them.

V. That government is, or ought to be, instituted for the common benefit, protection and security of the people, nation or community; and not for the particular emolument or advantage of any single man, family, or soft of men, who are a part only of that community, And that the community hath an indubitable, unalienable and indefeasible right to reform, alter, or abolish government in such manner as shall be by that community judged most conducive to the public weal.
 
VI. That those who are employed in the legislative and executive business of the State, may be restrained from oppression, the people have a right, at such periods as they may think proper, to reduce their public officers to a private station, and supply the vacancies by certain and regular elections.
 
VII. That all elections ought to be free; and that all free men having a sufficient evident common interest with, and attachment to the community, have a right to elect officers, or to be elected into office.

VIII. That every member of society hath a right to be protected in the enjoyment of life, liberty and property, and therefore is bound to contribute his proportion towards the expence of that protection, and yield his personal service when necessary, or an equivalent thereto: But no part of a man's property can be justly taken from him, or applied to public uses, without his own consent, or that of his legal representatives: Nor can any man who is conscientiously scrupulous of bearing arms, be justly compelled thereto, if he will pay such equivalent, nor are the people bound by any laws, but such as they have in like manner assented to, for their common good.

IX. That in all prosecutions for criminal offences, a man hath a right to be heard by himself and his council, to demand the cause and nature of his accusation, to be confronted with the witnesses, to call for evidence in his favour, and a speedy public trial, by an impartial jury of the country, without the unanimous consent of which jury he cannot be found guilty; nor can he be compelled to give evidence against himself; nor can any man be justly deprived of his liberty except by the laws of the land, or the judgment of his peers.
 
X. That the people have a right to hold themselves, their houses, papers, and possessions free from search and seizure, and therefore warrants without oaths or affirmations first made, affording a sufficient foundation for them, and whereby any officer or messenger may be commanded or required to search suspected places, or to seize any person or persons, his or their property, not particularly described, are contrary to that right, and ought not to be granted.
 
XI. That in controversies respecting property, and in suits between man and man, the parties have a right to trial by jury, which ought to be held sacred.

XII. That the people have a right to freedom of speech, and of writing, and publishing their sentiments; therefore the freedom of the press ought not to be restrained.
 
XIII. That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the state; and as standing armies in the time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up; And that the military should be kept under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.

XIV. That a frequent recurrence to fundamental principles, and a firm adherence to justice, moderation, temperance, industry, and frugality are absolutely necessary to preserve the blessings of liberty, and keep a government free: The people ought therefore to pay particular attention to these points in the choice of officers and representatives, and have a right to exact a due and constant regard to them, from their legislatures and magistrates, in the making and executing such laws as are necessary for the good government of the state.
 
XV. That all men have a natural inherent right to emigrate from one state to another that will receive them, or to form a new state in vacant countries, or in such countries as they can purchase, whenever they think that thereby they may promote their own happiness.

XVI. That the people have a right to assemble together, to consult for their common good, to instruct their representatives, and to apply to the legislature for redress of grievances, by address, petition, or remonstrance.




So, as it turns out with respect to Pennsylvania,  documented history tells us the people therein decided, long before our existing Constitution was adopted, to guarantee a right to bear arms for "defense of themselves", in addition to the defense of the State, and, by the adoption of the 2nd Amendment  they went on to specifically forbid the federal government to enter their state and “infringe” upon the people’s already existing right to keep and bear arms established by their state Declaration of Rights.


JWK



  "The Constitution is the act of the people, speaking in their original character, and defining the permanent conditions of the social alliance; and there can be no doubt on the point with us, that every act of the legislative power contrary to the true intent and meaning of the Constitution, is absolutely null and void. ___ Chancellor James Kent, in his Commentaries on American Law, 1858.

Online Bigun

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 54,713
  • Gender: Male
  • Resistance to Tyrants is Obedience to God
    • The FairTax Plan
Re: The right to keep and bear arms, our Founders' documented intentions
« Reply #1 on: February 24, 2018, 02:10:43 pm »
Yep!  There is NO doubt about it!

"I wish it need not have happened in my time," said Frodo.

"So do I," said Gandalf, "and so do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us."
- J. R. R. Tolkien

Offline Jazzhead

  • Blue lives matter
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,593
  • Gender: Male
Re: The right to keep and bear arms, our Founders' documented intentions
« Reply #2 on: February 24, 2018, 02:27:57 pm »
Yep!  There is NO doubt about it!

The doubt arises because of the fact that the Federal Constitution is worded very differently;  certainly the PA Declaration of Rights shows that the folks back then considered the right to bear arms both in the context of defense of the state and the individual.   But the right in the Federal Constitution is framed solely in the context of the defense of the "free state".    That difference is significant.

The bottom line for me is that the RKBA IS an individual right under the federal Constitution, derivative of the natural right of self-defense.   I think Scalia in Heller essentially confirms that, although it took over two centuries to do so. 

But the 2A is simply not the foundation of that right.   The individual, natural right of self defense is protected by the Constitution by the same authority that the Constitution protects the individual and natural rights of privacy and self-determination.    As Blackmun is to the abortion right, so is Scalia to the gun right.   
« Last Edit: February 24, 2018, 02:29:38 pm by Jazzhead »
It's crackers to slip a rozzer the dropsy in snide

Offline johnwk

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 94
Re: The right to keep and bear arms, our Founders' documented intentions
« Reply #3 on: February 24, 2018, 07:27:58 pm »
The doubt arises because of the fact that the Federal Constitution is worded very differently; 

I think the doubt arises among those who are delinquent in researching our country's founding documents to determine the actual intentions and beliefs under which our Constitution was agreed to.  There is no sense in having a written Constitution if it can be made to mean whatever those in power want it to mean.

JWK



The whole aim of construction, as applied to a provision of the Constitution, is to discover the meaning, to ascertain and give effect to the intent of its framers and the people who adopted it.
_____HOME BLDG. & LOAN ASS'N v. BLAISDELL, 290 U.S. 398 (1934)




Offline INVAR

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,961
  • Gender: Male
  • Dread To Tread
    • Sword At The Ready
Re: The right to keep and bear arms, our Founders' documented intentions
« Reply #4 on: February 24, 2018, 07:51:04 pm »
I think the doubt arises among those who are delinquent in researching our country's founding documents to determine the actual intentions and beliefs under which our Constitution was agreed to.  There is no sense in having a written Constitution if it can be made to mean whatever those in power want it to mean.

Correction John.

They are NOT delinquent in researching our country's founding documents and opinions of the Patriarchs.  They know it well and are exploiting every potential argument they craft in order to pervert, change, ignore, dispense with or otherwise abolish those things they want eliminated in order to 'make the government better'.

They are NOT delinquent.  They are deliberate.

Turning our enumerated inalienable Rights into government-granted and regulated privileges is the full-bore movement now.
Fart for freedom, fart for liberty and fart proudly.  - Benjamin Franklin

...Obsta principiis—Nip the shoots of arbitrary power in the bud, is the only maxim which can ever preserve the liberties of any people. When the people give way, their deceivers, betrayers and destroyers press upon them so fast that there is no resisting afterwards. The nature of the encroachment upon [the] American constitution is such, as to grow every day more and more encroaching. Like a cancer, it eats faster and faster every hour." - John Adams, February 6, 1775

Online Cyber Liberty

  • Coffee! Donuts! Kittens!
  • Administrator
  • ******
  • Posts: 82,040
  • Gender: Male
  • 🌵🌵🌵
Re: The right to keep and bear arms, our Founders' documented intentions
« Reply #5 on: February 24, 2018, 08:48:21 pm »
Correction John.

They are NOT delinquent in researching our country's founding documents and opinions of the Patriarchs.  They know it well and are exploiting every potential argument they craft in order to pervert, change, ignore, dispense with or otherwise abolish those things they want eliminated in order to 'make the government better'.

They are NOT delinquent.  They are deliberate.

Turning our enumerated inalienable Rights into government-granted and regulated privileges is the full-bore movement now.

A lot of time and energy is spent twisting the meanings of the words in the Constitution and Bill Of rights, the end goal being to render them meaningless.  Because mention of a militia is made prior to asserting the right to keep and bear arms, for example, it's twisted to mean "No militia, no individual right."  Then, court rulings that clearly refute that garbage are twisted and constantly quoted out of context to support the notion. 

Ultimately, we end up seeing court decisions being the ultimate understanding of the principles of the Bill of Rights, not the words of the Bill themselves.  Lawyers build entire careers out of twisting the meanings.
For unvaccinated, we are looking at a winter of severe illness and death — if you’re unvaccinated — for themselves, their families, and the hospitals they’ll soon overwhelm. Sloe Joe Biteme 12/16
I will NOT comply.
 
Castillo del Cyber Autonomous Zone ~~~~~>                          :dontfeed:

Offline Jazzhead

  • Blue lives matter
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,593
  • Gender: Male
Re: The right to keep and bear arms, our Founders' documented intentions
« Reply #6 on: February 24, 2018, 09:24:33 pm »
A lot of time and energy is spent twisting the meanings of the words in the Constitution and Bill Of rights, the end goal being to render them meaningless.  Because mention of a militia is made prior to asserting the right to keep and bear arms, for example, it's twisted to mean "No militia, no individual right."  Then, court rulings that clearly refute that garbage are twisted and constantly quoted out of context to support the notion. 

Ultimately, we end up seeing court decisions being the ultimate understanding of the principles of the Bill of Rights, not the words of the Bill themselves.  Lawyers build entire careers out of twisting the meanings.

The one doing the twisting is you.  I've made it perfectly clear that I agree with Scalia that the RKBA is (i) an individual right that (ii) is protected by the Constitution.   

It just isn't protected by the Second Amendment,  which addresses the need for preserving the conditions for the militia, not the natural right belonging to you and me to protect our persons, families and property.

It doesn't take the machinations of a lawyer to read the WHOLE Second Amendment, including the predicate clause.   That's exactly how the Bill should be read, according to what Justice Thomas recently wrote.  The Second Amendment means exactly what it says.   Divorcing the phrase you like from the predicate clause you don't is where the "twisting" comes in.   
   
It's crackers to slip a rozzer the dropsy in snide

Offline johnwk

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 94
Re: The right to keep and bear arms, our Founders' documented intentions
« Reply #7 on: February 24, 2018, 09:31:52 pm »
Correction John.

They are NOT delinquent in researching our country's founding documents and opinions of the Patriarchs.  They know it well and are exploiting every potential argument they craft in order to pervert, change, ignore, dispense with or otherwise abolish those things they want eliminated in order to 'make the government better'.


I am talking about the unsuspecting who accept and believe what the evil doers assert is within the meaning of our Constitution.  They are the ones who are delinquent in researching what our Constitution means as it was understood by its framers and the people who adopted it.


JWK


 
"On every question of construction [of the Constitution], carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed."--Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Johnson, June 12, 1823, The Complete Jefferson, p. 322.



Offline INVAR

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,961
  • Gender: Male
  • Dread To Tread
    • Sword At The Ready
Re: The right to keep and bear arms, our Founders' documented intentions
« Reply #8 on: February 24, 2018, 09:46:46 pm »
I am talking about the unsuspecting who accept and believe what the evil doers assert is within the meaning of our Constitution.  They are the ones who are delinquent in researching what our Constitution means as it was understood by its framers and the people who adopted it.

Gotcha.

The includes those brainwashed in the Leftist publik indoctrination centers they call skools.  Because as you know... it doesn't matter what a bunch of dead-white slave owners believed or had to say about anything.  They were evil and thus we need to 'remake' and 'fundamentally transform' everything they put down on parchment and remake it all into the "way it should be" to quote Obama from his tweet to anti-gun teens the other day.
Fart for freedom, fart for liberty and fart proudly.  - Benjamin Franklin

...Obsta principiis—Nip the shoots of arbitrary power in the bud, is the only maxim which can ever preserve the liberties of any people. When the people give way, their deceivers, betrayers and destroyers press upon them so fast that there is no resisting afterwards. The nature of the encroachment upon [the] American constitution is such, as to grow every day more and more encroaching. Like a cancer, it eats faster and faster every hour." - John Adams, February 6, 1775

Offline RoosGirl

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16,759
Re: The right to keep and bear arms, our Founders' documented intentions
« Reply #9 on: February 24, 2018, 09:47:13 pm »
The one doing the twisting is you.  I've made it perfectly clear that I agree with Scalia that the RKBA is (i) an individual right that (ii) is protected by the Constitution.   

It just isn't protected by the Second Amendment,  which addresses the need for preserving the conditions for the militia, not the natural right belonging to you and me to protect our persons, families and property.

It doesn't take the machinations of a lawyer to read the WHOLE Second Amendment, including the predicate clause.   That's exactly how the Bill should be read, according to what Justice Thomas recently wrote.  The Second Amendment means exactly what it says.   Divorcing the phrase you like from the predicate clause you don't is where the "twisting" comes in.   
 
If that is the case then the Federal gov't has no standing to regulate firearms for individual ownership since it is not enumerated within.

Offline INVAR

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,961
  • Gender: Male
  • Dread To Tread
    • Sword At The Ready
Re: The right to keep and bear arms, our Founders' documented intentions
« Reply #10 on: February 24, 2018, 09:58:11 pm »
The one doing the twisting is you.  ...It doesn't take the machinations of a lawyer to read the WHOLE Second Amendment, including the predicate clause.   That's exactly how the Bill should be read, according to what Justice Thomas recently wrote.  The Second Amendment means exactly what it says.   Divorcing the phrase you like from the predicate clause you don't is where the "twisting" comes in.   
 

A perfect example here of the 'Deliberate" I was referencing to you @johnwk

The deliberate effort to whitewash the natural right to keep and bear arms not just for self-defense in the home, but especially for the purpose of resisting government tyranny.  When we no longer consent to be governed by a corrupt and lawless government that has voided it's authority entirely and to establish new guards for our future liberty and security; the keeping and bearing of arms as an inalienable and inviolable right, predicates the means and power that a people possess to do so.
« Last Edit: February 24, 2018, 09:58:51 pm by INVAR »
Fart for freedom, fart for liberty and fart proudly.  - Benjamin Franklin

...Obsta principiis—Nip the shoots of arbitrary power in the bud, is the only maxim which can ever preserve the liberties of any people. When the people give way, their deceivers, betrayers and destroyers press upon them so fast that there is no resisting afterwards. The nature of the encroachment upon [the] American constitution is such, as to grow every day more and more encroaching. Like a cancer, it eats faster and faster every hour." - John Adams, February 6, 1775

Offline johnwk

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 94
Re: Kelo and judicial tyranny
« Reply #11 on: February 24, 2018, 10:06:24 pm »
Ultimately, we end up seeing court decisions being the ultimate understanding of the principles of the Bill of Rights, not the words of the Bill themselves.  Lawyers build entire careers out of twisting the meanings.

So do Justices on our Supreme court.  In fact, one actually took it upon himself to admit he was altering the meaning of our Constitution to accommodate an alleged “evolving needs of society”, when the constitutional method to accommodate the "evolving needs of society" is specifically provided for under Article V, our Constitution’s amendment process.


Keep in mind that: ”Words or terms used in a constitution, being dependent on ratification by the people voting upon it, must be understood in the sense most obvious to the common understanding at the time of its adoption…”__ (my emphasis) ___ 16 Am Jur 2d Constitutional law, Meaning of Language



In the Kelo case, Justice Stevens in delivering the opinion of the Court writes:


while many state courts in the mid-19th century endorsed "use by the public" as the proper definition of public use, that narrow view steadily eroded over time. Not only was the "use by the public" test difficult to administer (e.g., what proportion of the public need have access to the property? at what price?),7 but it proved to be impractical given the diverse and always evolving needs of society.8 Accordingly, when this Court began applying the Fifth Amendment to the States at the close of the 19th century, it embraced the broader and more natural interpretation of public use as "public purpose."


The irrefutable fact is, the people did not erode the meaning of “public use” via an appropriate constitutional amendment process which is the only lawful way to change the meaning of words in a Constitution. The Court took it upon itself to do for the people what they did not willingly and knowingly do for themselves with a constitutional amendment as required by our Constitution, and, the Court brazenly appealed to the “evolving needs of society”  to justify its own  “broader and more natural interpretation” of “public use”.  And this amounts to judicial tyranny!

On the other hand, Justice Thomas, in his dissenting opinion, observes the rules of constitutional law and carefully documents the meaning of the words “public use” as they were understood during the time the constitution was adopted.  He then concludes:

”
The Court relies almost exclusively on this Court's prior cases to derive today's far-reaching, and dangerous, result. See ante, at 8-12. But the principles this Court should employ to dispose of this case are found in the Public Use Clause itself, not in Justice Peckham's high opinion of reclamation laws, see supra, at 11. When faced with a clash of constitutional principle and a line of unreasoned cases wholly divorced from the text, history, and structure of our founding document, we should not hesitate to resolve the tension in favor of the Constitution's original meaning. For the reasons I have given, and for the reasons given in Justice O'Connor's dissent, the conflict of principle raised by this boundless use of the eminent domain power should be resolved in petitioners' favor. I would reverse the judgment of the Connecticut Supreme Court.”



JWK




Those who reject abiding by the intentions and beliefs under which our Constitution was agree to, as those intentions and beliefs may be documented from historical records, wish to remove the anchor and rudder of our constitutional system so they may then be free to “interpret” the Constitution to mean whatever they wish it to mean. 


« Last Edit: February 24, 2018, 10:13:46 pm by johnwk »

Online Cyber Liberty

  • Coffee! Donuts! Kittens!
  • Administrator
  • ******
  • Posts: 82,040
  • Gender: Male
  • 🌵🌵🌵
Re: The right to keep and bear arms, our Founders' documented intentions
« Reply #12 on: February 24, 2018, 10:14:58 pm »
The one doing the twisting is you.

What made you think I was writing about you, @Jazzhead?  Paranoid much? :laugh:
For unvaccinated, we are looking at a winter of severe illness and death — if you’re unvaccinated — for themselves, their families, and the hospitals they’ll soon overwhelm. Sloe Joe Biteme 12/16
I will NOT comply.
 
Castillo del Cyber Autonomous Zone ~~~~~>                          :dontfeed:

Offline INVAR

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,961
  • Gender: Male
  • Dread To Tread
    • Sword At The Ready
Re: Kelo and judicial tyranny
« Reply #13 on: February 24, 2018, 10:15:53 pm »
The Court took it upon itself to do for the people what they did not willingly and knowingly do for themselves with a constitutional amendment as required by our Constitution, and, the Court brazenly appealed to the “evolving needs of society”  to justify its own  “broader and more natural interpretation” of “public use”.  And this amounts to judicial tyranny!

That is exactly the base and position that our resident Leftist argues his agenda from; citing often the interpretations and rulings that foster the 'evolving needs of society' within the 'broader and more natural interpretations' of enumerated rights that is said to be *reasonably regulated*.  This argued ad nauseum while "rights" not enumerated in the Constitution and crafted out of thin air to assuage the 'evolving needs of society', as existing within "penumbras and emanations" of the Constitution so as to trample enumerated rights with newfound 'rights' an 'evolving society' has need of in accord of Judicial decree.
Fart for freedom, fart for liberty and fart proudly.  - Benjamin Franklin

...Obsta principiis—Nip the shoots of arbitrary power in the bud, is the only maxim which can ever preserve the liberties of any people. When the people give way, their deceivers, betrayers and destroyers press upon them so fast that there is no resisting afterwards. The nature of the encroachment upon [the] American constitution is such, as to grow every day more and more encroaching. Like a cancer, it eats faster and faster every hour." - John Adams, February 6, 1775

Online Cyber Liberty

  • Coffee! Donuts! Kittens!
  • Administrator
  • ******
  • Posts: 82,040
  • Gender: Male
  • 🌵🌵🌵
Re: The right to keep and bear arms, our Founders' documented intentions
« Reply #14 on: February 24, 2018, 10:18:25 pm »
If that is the case then the Federal gov't has no standing to regulate firearms for individual ownership since it is not enumerated within.

The Constitution is a rock...except when it isn't. :shrug:
For unvaccinated, we are looking at a winter of severe illness and death — if you’re unvaccinated — for themselves, their families, and the hospitals they’ll soon overwhelm. Sloe Joe Biteme 12/16
I will NOT comply.
 
Castillo del Cyber Autonomous Zone ~~~~~>                          :dontfeed: