The Second Amendment

---

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. -2nd Amendment to the US Constitution

No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government. -Thomas Jefferson

When Congress banned assault weapons, I snapped. -Timothy McVeigh

The Second Amendment is intended to guarantee the existence of an armed citizenry capable of defeating the forces of the federal government in battle. Period. This is not a pleasant and politically correct reality, but there it is, and until such time as the Constitution may be amended otherwise, there it remains. 

And at the risk of tempering what enthusiasm this clear assertion may elicit from gun owners, I would point out to such of them as still support the war in Iraq that if they want to see the principle of the Second Amendment in action they need look no further.


As James Madison, the "father of the Constitution", wrote in Federalist Paper #46-

"The highest number to which, according to the best computation, a standing army can be carried in any country, does not exceed one hundredth part of the whole number of souls; or one twenty-fifth part of the number able to bear arms. This proportion would not yield, in the United States, an army of more than twenty-five or thirty thousand men. To these would be opposed a militia amounting to near half a million of citizens with arms in their hands, officered by men chosen from among themselves, fighting for their common liberties, and united and conducted by governments possessing their affections and confidence. It may well be doubted, whether a militia thus circumstanced could ever be conquered by such a proportion of regular troops. Those who are best acquainted with the last successful resistance of this country against the British arms, will be most inclined to deny the possibility of it."


I'm not against disarmament in principle, in fact I'm for it, but we need to start at the top. I'm a lot more comfortable with my neighbor having a gun than I am with politicians, particularly the latest group, having hydrogen bombs.