Would you stroll barefoot through snake-infested grass? Only if you want those snakes to kill you. Would you wait for an enemy to attack you before you consider owning a weapon? Only if you want that snake to kill you. This snake seeks you out to destroy you; He was first discovered in the Garden of Eden; His name is Evil.
Before walking in snake-infested grass, put on your shoes. To protect yourself from that more insidious snake who vows to destroy America, Christianity, and our way of life; arm yourself.
Every American patriot must be armed. This upcoming book explains precisely why. It should be available the first week of April. God bless America.
In the Bill of Rights, the Second Amendment to the Constitution reads:
“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 real purpose and intent of the wording of this amendment has been argued for decades. Historically, it has meant two different things to people depending upon their opinions and preferences regarding gun control. Even members of our Supreme Court differ on the interpretation, ordinarily based on their political leanings and preferences; and to whom they owe allegiance for their appointments.
Those justices appointed by a Democrat president who prefers strict gun control ordinarily hold to that conviction with their votes. Justices appointed by Republican presidents ordinarily vote the opposite view; that the freedom to keep and bear arms is an individual right.
All historical documents that explain the purpose for the Second Amendment, the right to keep and bear arms, reference the primary purpose for that amendment; to maintain the means to repel a tyrannical federal government that might take away those liberties guaranteed by our Constitution. The original writers expressed the idea that man’s natural leaning is to instinctively grasp more personal power for himself; and given that position as president might not refuse himself from doing so if given any leeway to take that action. As commander-in-chief, a president would have that inherent power, authority, and position. It was assumed, at that time, than any foreign invader would be repelled by the standing national army.
Wording, intentions, perspectives and time sway interpretations of those few words in the Second Amendment. For example, the word ‘Militia’ was written, and considered, at a time when individual states were considered more independent from the federal government. Since that time, the name has changed from ‘Militia’ to ‘National Guard.’ Even the new title ‘National’ suggests or implies that these state units no longer exist just for the protection of a state, as in a ‘State Militia.’ When necessary, or when expedient for a national purpose, the commander-in-chief can activate them - and they are no longer a ‘state militia.’
In effect; a state militia, now a National Guard Unit, is no longer free to maintain a state free from the military encroachment of a federal military unit - they are part of that federal military unit. This simple understanding circumvents the intended purpose for the words written at that time - the time of the Second Amendment’s creation. To maintain the purpose for the words of the Second Amendment, the other words must be considered. They are:
“...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.”
If we understand the purpose of the Second Amendment to be the protection of states, and of the people of those states, then the people’s protection must be paramount. States no longer have a Constitutional right to protect themselves - they are now part of the whole, militarily. Clearly, our Founding Fathers understood the weaknesses and vulnerability of those given power to seek more and greater power even at the expense of individual freedom of the nation’s citizens. Obviously, they realized a fully armed citizenry was urgent to maintain reasonable actions from what could be a less than benign leader; one who might be guided to tyranny by a power lust.
Considering words, time, and separation of power, only one conclusion can reasonably be made about the interpretation of those few words. Each competent and responsible American citizen has the right to own a weapon, and for two purposes:
First is to fulfill the tenets of the Second Amendment. That is to discourage tyranny from power-lust leaders who have the power and position to fulfill that lust.
Second is to fulfill our God-given right to protect ourselves and our families against any evil-doer who would threaten our existence. God put us here; certainly He meant for no earthly person to take that life from us. A gun is a weapon of defense that helps us feel secure in this land of individual freedom - at least freedom as we exist at this moment in time.
There is also a Bible verse that discusses the concept of security as a means of deception. Daniel 8:25 says: “He will cause deceit to prosper, and he will consider himself superior. When they feel secure, he will destroy many and take his stand against the Prince of princes.” What could this concept of security mean to us in our present time, and as paralleled in the Bible? It means that perhaps the emphasis on ‘security’ will be the tool to take our weapons from us.
Could this possibly mean that when Barack Obama, or any other president in the future, confiscates our weapons, it will be under the pretense of making us more ‘secure?’ The guise might well be that if no one owns a weapon everybody will be secure and safe. This is the claim of those who now so strongly support more gun control. It’s their powerful mantra. It’s the only argument they can propose. Their argument has Biblical implications.
If that were to happen; if powerful leaders were to confiscate our guns, our defenses, could that in any way make us safer? Absolutely not. It would mean our government would have no hesitancies to further encroach upon our Constitutional rights, and we would be vulnerable to personal attacks by anyone who would have a weapon; we would be totally defenseless. That means if anyone wants to kill or otherwise injure us, we would be helpless and defenseless - not safe and secure. But how could this confiscation happen? It could happen in the name of ‘safety’ and ‘security.’
All it would take is one simple terrorist attack in America. All it would take is for a president to declare martial law because we ‘are under threat from terrorism’ and it will make everything ‘safer’ if no one has a weapon. If that were to happen, only the government and the terrorists would have weapons. That would be our death sign. It would be the death of America as we know it.
To create and allow our highest possibility of safety in America, not only should every competent and responsible citizen in America be allowed to own weapons; every citizen should be required to own a weapon. Furthermore, they should be taught how to use those weapons effectively to defend our nation and our freedom. Everyone working together, including our federal government; that’s the real meaning of America: freedom and liberty.