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.”

In the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America, various freedoms (religion, speech, press, assembly and petition) are outlined which the founders deemed vital to a free nation. The language is unambiguous in its intent and framing. It is a solid statement, in response to grievances which had been previously suffered at the hands of a foreign king.

To guarantee those rights, the second amendment was enacted to assure the citizenry the means to implement them. Again, the language is unambiguous, but, like the first, it is under constant attack by those who seek to destroy our freedoms. They recognize that an armed citizenry is less likely to be overcome by an over zealous abridger of freedom and liberty.

I have come to believe that the true strength of the constitution lies in the threat it presents to those who would abridge our liberty. Our enemies, both foreign and domestic, seek to alter our governance to the whims of men and not law. If they can manage to subvert the intentions and wisdom of the founding fathers, they can make strides toward the subjugation of the people through incremental denial of guaranteed rights. This is why our sovereignty is under constant attack. Any persons who wish to turn our national will over to any group of international figures fails miserably to understand the principles which have made our nation what it is today.

There is a reason why the executive branch cannot make treaties with foreign entities without congressional approval. As representatives of the people, they supposedly represent the will of each individual citizen. Granted, not all of us agree, but in the majority the collective will may be expressed.

When those in government ignore the will of the folks who are paying for representative government and ignore their intentions we have that option left which every one dreads; the use of the second amendment to implement the first and all others. The last time the union was seriously threatened the death toll exceeded a two-thirds of a million. The union was preserved as a result of that horrendous loss of life and the good offices of a man who thoroughly understood our constitution, Abraham Lincoln.

In the United States today, we have been attacked by forces which our people do not understand. Ideological warfare, economic warfare, and legislative mischief are not as easily understood as a full out assault on the beaches of the Carolinas or California. Our people readily grasp an armada of bombers or a flotilla of warships off our shores; when they are exposed to intellectual dishonesty—not so much. They would much prefer to be able to identify a despot, dictator, or czar as a threat to our peace. The ramifications of economic warfare baffle the average Joe.

We have become accustomed to using familiar templates in our lives as identifiers of oncoming grief. Barring an easily identifiable enemy they are less able to recognize the peril to the republic. It is even more difficult when the danger comes cloaked in supposed social good, world peace, or spiritual garb. Every reader has a tale to relate about confronting indifference by a friend or family member. When their formerly dependable media fail to report an ideological or economic assault, their eyes glaze over and they assume that everything’s just fine.

Well, it is not “just fine.” Both the first and second amendments are constantly assailed by those who favor top down governance. Neither is conducive to despotism. So long as we have an armed populace, we have a fall back position to enforce the wisdom contained in our constitution. Although dreadful to contemplate, the presence of millions of armed citizens may finally be that which urges potential oppressors to find greener pastures. As Americans finally figure out the danger they will become increasingly resistant.

Today it is manifest in scrupulously peaceful protests. On 9/12 in D.C., there was no evidence of arms, rude behavior, hooliganism, threats, or other violations of good conduct. So far, the only hard examples of violence have come from those who are counter-protesting the Tea Party crowd. I fear that as the disintegration of government continues, the people will finally become impatient with their leaders. As the reason and patriotism of the leadership gradually disappears from the scene, they may well become enraged to the point of violence. As the essentials of moral government are shoved aside a more primal side of the protest movement may well come surging to the top.

Are these folks actually capable of violence? Keep in mind they are the ones who have already fought America’s wars, run the country’s businesses, raised our nation’s children, and strived within their own communities for the betterment of every citizen. They are also those who wish to enjoy the rights of their fathers, have the opportunities to succeed, and have families of their own. Not least among them are those who have lived a full life of freedom, made their own individual mark, enjoy the love of their progeny and are more than well aware of the history of the greatest country in the world. They are not constrained by gender, age, color, or financial equity. Their common goal is the furtherance of the America which they all love and honor. They do not want “change” and their “hopes” do not coincide with the current despotic agenda. They have become more fed up with events each day.

A safe prediction will be that the tipping point will not come in a cataclysmic event. As more and more people disapprove of governmental action, there will be an incident here and an event there. Each of those will be dependent upon the emotional content of the grief dispensed to lone individuals. The targets may well not be household names whose role in government is not as obvious to everyone as to the person who finally exacts his version of appropriate revenge.

Depending on the response to these actions, others will see “permission” to continue the purge and gradually escalate the resistance. As pressure mounts to stifle this violent dissent, only then will the movement gather an organizational capacity. One instance then will lead to another until we reach the level of the grounds at Lexington and the “Bridge at Concord.”

This piece is an opinion and not a call to arms. That call is unnecessary. We are already armed and we certainly don’t agree with our “betters” in Washington. It is impossible to insult a Tea Party Protester by associating him with a homosexual deviation or define him as a “right-wing extremist.” Most wear those labels with pride and the knowledge that they know what the protest is all about. It is about liberty. It is about freedom. It is about sovereignty. Most important, it is about “defending the Constitution of the United States against all enemies both foreign and domestic.” They took that oath and they believe every word of it.

We have been here before and, God willing, we shall be here the next time our country is under attack. Some may pay dearly to defend our freedoms but that is nothing new in our history. No one looks forward to this situation but also none will shun his responsibility to his fellow citizens. They never have and they never will.


In His abiding love,

Cecil Moon