Nothing evokes more emotion than “it’s for the children”. If we cannot secure Liberty for our children, what is the point? Should we sit back and listen to the thunderous applause for our legislators’ attempts to secure the safety of our children? Do you think that our children’s safety is more important to them than their indoctrination by the state?

Let’s go back to a time when our children went to school to be educated. That education included firearms’ training in the schools. Rifle teams and shooting ranges were part of that period. And yet, our children were safe. What has changed? Besides 1 in 6 of our children currently being treated with psychiatric drugs? Besides a legal system that is more concerned with political perception than safety and protection. Besides the transformation of our schools into indoctrination camps? We see the results in the children being used by the media to exploit a tragedy.

Let’s be honest: the 2nd Amendment is under attack and is the focus of all efforts of the other side. Why? Let’s begin at the reason for the 2nd Amendment.

When the Constitution was signed on September 17, 1787, federalists claimed the new government would only have limited powers expressly delegated to it. This wasn’t enough for anti-federalists like George Mason, who wanted explicit guarantees to certain rights in order to prevent any potential encroachment by the federal government.

One of them was the right to keep and bear arms. Mason wrote:

“A well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defence of a free State”

The Founding Fathers, having just broken away from Great Britain, understood the new federal government they were ratifying might one day become just as tyrannical. If it had the authority to control citizen access to firearms, then it could disarm them, just as the British attempted to do. This would make any attempts to restore liberties futile.

The Second Amendment was specifically included in the Bill of Rights to prevent this.

The 2nd Amendment is not about personal security or hunting. It was meant to ensure that the government will be kept in its proper role. This then begs the question: why is the government so adamant on diminishing/eradicating the 2nd Amendment. Again, some facts are self-evident.

David DeGerolamo

This entry was posted in 2nd Amendment, Editorial. Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Prescient?

  1. Hadenoughalready says:

    Our Second Amendment has been in place for 231 years and has afforded all citizens the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, with few exceptions, yet the left is adamant on removing it. Why?

    Why are simple, common sense remedies not being applied?

    Simple answer: To disarm and subjugate the American people, leaving them at the mercy of those who knowingly failed to protect us.

    The Sheriff in this recent Florida school shooting has assisted local mosques in arming and training themselves, for self-defense, yet argues against arming teachers to protect our most vulnerable; our own kids. How is this right by any measure? And why is this NOT in any “news” headline?

    This and the following information needs to go viral!

    Follow the links for more and spread it far and wide -- PLEASE!

Leave a Reply