Friday, August 5, 2011

Gun Control and the Well-Regulated Militia

Secession cannot work without a militia.

by Russell D. Longcore

Gun control is today’s subject. The issue has thankfully dropped from the radar screen in the aftermath of September 11th. However, those who would outlaw gun ownership are undaunted and patient. They know that another school shooting or mass murder will eventually occur in the United States, and that event will propel this issue back onto the front pages and lead stories in the news media. So, let us examine the issue of gun control in light of history and a strict interpretation of the Constitution.

The Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States says:

“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”.

Any State with a well regulated Militia would be capable of defending itself from Federal tyranny. Over the past two hundred years, the individual States have forgotten that their security as a free State relies upon a well regulated Militia. The first two phrases in the Amendment shed light on today’s power structure in the United States. The Federal government now has standing armies, navies and an air force that far outnumbers any state militia. So, state sovereignty has been destroyed. Now states are more like counties…no sovereignty, only slave territories of a cancer-ridden Federal system.

Let’s consider the definition of the word “arms”.

The Second Amendment does not define the word “arms” but leaves it open to definition and expansion in the future. “Arms” were not only firearms, but any weapon that could be used to defend one’s life or property. Why then do the anti-gun advocates only single out firearms as the focus of their desire to disarm Americans? Why not archery equipment, swords, or knives, or sharpened sticks?

Next, let’s look at the word “infringe”. The Webster’s Dictionary defines “infringe” in two ways pertinent to this discussion; from the Latin “infrangere”:(1)”to break; to violate or go beyond the limits of: (2) to encroach upon.” In order to further explain the Second Amendment, the definition of the word “right” must also be considered, and is: “something due to one by law, custom or nature.” The “right” is the thing not to be infringed by government. In the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson writes of mankind being “endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights.” The definitions above speak directly to rights endowed to humans by natural law, and to the nature of man as a created being subject to God’s authority. These rights were among those enumerated as “Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.” Therefore, the Second Amendment states that the right to keep and bear arms is one that is endowed by our Creator under natural law and shall not be broken, violated or encroached upon. It validates the concept of personal property ownership, in this case one’s own person, and the principle of self-defense.

Many gun control advocates support, and have been successful in the criminalization of the ownership of certain automatic and semi- automatic weapons, the so-called “assault weapons”. They now seek to restrict the ownership of nearly all firearms by private citizens. Yet the issue of advancing technology was not an issue that the framers of the Constitution even considered worthy of mention. These were learned men, and were well aware of the technological improvements that were made in weaponry just in their lifetimes. They knew world history and knew that guns and gunpowder were relative newcomers to the art of war.

But please consider: at the time of the Revolutionary War, did not the Continental armies possess the same technology of armaments as the Redcoats? Yes.

Hadn’t the Colonial citizens owned and used firearms since the early 1600s? Yes!

Did the English soldiers have cartridges for their rifles while the Colonials had only musket and ball? No. Musket, ball and cannon were the leading technologies of the day.

Did only the King have the ability to build ships, forge cannon and cannonball? No. John Paul Jones was a privateer, which is basically a government-sponsored pirate, preying on English ships. His first wartime command was aboard the ship Providence, owned by New England businessman John Brown. The Providence bristled with cannons.

Both of the combatants in the Revolutionary War had the same technology in armaments. The Continental armies consisted of fighting citizens, taking up their rifles and pistols, forging cannon and going to war against superior numbers in the British army and navy, but not against superior weapons.

Therefore, when it came time for the framers of the Constitution to consider the Amendments, they did not even mention the possibility that the private citizen should be prevented from owning the same weapons as the military. Could it be that they considered the threat of government tyranny greater than that of citizens owning military weapons?

One of the beauties of the Constitution is its simplicity. The Second Amendment is written with no ambiguity in clear, simple words. Words have meaning. For decades now, those who would subjugate our citizens with Federal and State tyranny have fought to redefine the words of the Second Amendment. They have been successful in passing unconstitutional laws that do in fact infringe upon our right to keep and bear arms. The framers understood that with freedom comes responsibility, and that the ideas and acts of men have consequences. Yet they entrusted to future generations this simple Amendment. They possessed the foreknowledge that this newly formed government would have the same potential as governments throughout history to decline toward tyranny and totalitarianism.

This Amendment, along with the other original Amendments, were their lasting contribution to the establishment of what would become the mightiest nation in the history of mankind. They planted good seed in fertile ground, and God brought forth a nation from that seed as the people of that nation bowed their knees to His authority over them.

Sadly, this nation is no longer great, as the general populace has ceased bowing their knees to God, and have replaced it with worship of the State.

DumpDC. Six Letters That Can Change History.


  1. The phrase gun control refers to efforts to restrict or limit the possession, production, importation, shipment, sale, and/or use of guns by private citizens.

  2. Not to bang this drum again, but this article about the 2nd Amendment is the perfect example of why grammar matters. People have been parsing the effects of the commas in this Amendment for a hundred years. Look at the changes from just one comma being moved.

    “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”.

    Quite a difference. Now the stress is on the militia being necessary, instead of well regulated.

    THIS, is why clarity of speech matters.

  3. NobodysaysBOO!:
    ROOTY u got your participel dangling man!
    The opertive part is shall = will not be infringed.
    This has been infringed over and over, no matter how u spell it.

  4. The power in the hand and the thought in the mind are the only authorities needed to pursue ones inalienable right(s). As one breaths so to does the power to stop one from breathing; exist.

    When a deaf mute shoots an English teacher, does it sound proper?

    The word merchants; lawyers. Sellers of commas and quotation marks. Incestuous gay siblings to the money changers; bankers.



  5. William Rawle was a friend of George Washington and was going to be our first attorney general his Book “View of the Constitution” was used as text book in early America to teach the future leaders of our nation about the constitution.

    Rawle is also quoted in U.S. Senate doc 2807 from February 1982 on the right to keep and bear arms(please look it up if you haven’t already)

    Rawle writes that every word used in the writing of the Constitution was carefully studied as to maximize its effect in the constitution the Supreme Law of the land. (Words used in law often have a different meaning than use in everyday life.)

    The 2A was written as a Commanding Prohibition upon the Right to keep and Bear Arms.

    The word “Shall” is a “Command”, “Not” is a “Prohibition”, “Infringed as applied in the law at the time of the writing of the constitution implied “Trespass” which was “Entry” and “Transgress” which is “Encroachment”

    Thus in the 2A we have a Commanding Prohibition against the Entry and Encroachment upon the Right to keep and bear arms.

    Well regulated also had another meaning as applied by law. Regulated meant “arranged or placed. It also was a mechanical term meaning well equipped and trained.

    In the original meaning of the 2A it literally reads as the following.

    A well Placed, trained and Equipped (regulated) Armed Citizenry (militia) being necessary for the well being (security) of a free state, the authority and jurisdiction (right) of the people (you and I) shall not be entered or encroached (infringed)

    Interesting isn’t it. Sort of changes everything.

  6. THANKS well SPELT!

  7. note to the WORD WARDENS:
    When W said this sort of gramatical/syntax fumbel speech youall thought it was cute!
    NOW u dont want to be reminded that u supported BUSH!

  8. What is a "well-regulated militia?" Define that militia as all the citizens who possess firearms. REGULATING them is required. Hence there are laws concerning the possession and use of firearms.