We either have a Constitution which enumerates certain “inalienable rights” or we do not.  According to those following the Liberal Agenda largely fronted by the Democratic Party, some Establishment RINO Republicans, the Main Stream Media, and many Hollywood Elitists the 2^nd Amendment IS NOT an Inalienable Right of Every Law Abiding Citizen.  They construct the Constitution in such a manner as to obliterate the view of the Founding and Framers, and totally ignore historical evidence that it means INDIVIDUALS not simply organized Militias.

I want to take a stroll through history and if you care to join me you are most welcome.  I want us to consider some of the overlooked facts the “gun grabbers” conveniently omit from their plethora of arguments devoid of facts.  If you honestly examine history, not just that of the United States, the Colonies, but British Law and British Constitutions you will discover something amazing regarding the “Right to Keep and Bear Arms.”  The Colonist, pre-revolution recognized the RIGHT of every person to “keep and bear arms”.  They understood that that right was not something the government could or should attempt to tamper with for they viewed it as a basic human right or inalienable right that came from God Himself, not the government.  What you may or may not know is that the concept of the right to “keep and bear arms” did not begin with the Bill of Rights it predated dating back to the 17th Century in England.

The fact that the Colonist eventually revolted against the British Crown makes British history of significant importance in this matter.  The individual’s right to own a gun was settled in Britain in 1689 and the historical record indicates that not only was it recognized that every British citizen had a right to “own a gun” they were expected to do so.  The British Declaration Bill of Rights in 1689 listed among the grievances of the British subjects that the Crown was violating the individual right to own firearms.  The debate seems to have centered on the 1662 Militia Act which focused on the confiscation of private firearms.  Sound familiar?  Where they were is exactly where the Leftist want to take us today.  I suggest the results will be similar if the Left actually achieves their goal of a “gun confiscation” law.  The Act in 1689 did not create a new individual right, it recognized an existing one. They deemed the right to belong to the individual not the collective and the individual right to “keep and bear arms” was for the “common defense” and for individual “self-defense.”   WAKE UP LEFTIST, History is against you in your inane argument that the gun is the problem and your wrong argument that the right means MILITIA, not INDIVIDUALS.  You are wrong!

I find it completely understandable that one of the first outbreaks of resistance at Lexington and Concord came as a result of the British Army attempting to confiscate the firearms of individuals.  Our own Declaration of Independence clearly states that there are inalienable rights and among those are “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”  That statement and recognition necessitate the right to own guns for the purpose of securing both life and liberty.  Long before the Second Amendment, British Common Law adopted in the Colonies respected private ownership of firearms.  And yes, Alice, they had the same type of firearms as did the Militia and no it was not intended to restrict that to a black-powder single shot musket.  I find it powerful that in Pennsylvania their constitution specifically stated, “the people have a right to bear arms for the defense of themselves and the state.”  If you will check the record you will find that no less than nine (9), state constitutions adopted in the 18^th century or early 19^th century acknowledged the right to bear arms for “self-defense.”

The Founders and Framers including James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, Richard Henry Lee, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, George Mason, and Thomas Paine to name a few demanded the right be kept intact.  I guess they would be labeled “deplorables” by the Left today and called every unconscionable name in the books for their position on this inalienable right.  Alexander Hamilton went so far as to argue that the greatest threat to liberty was if the government ever deprived the citizens of the right to “keep and bear arms” and called it the “original right of self-defense.”  Richard Henry Lee believed that every citizen should be armed.  In fact, North Carolina and Rhode Island refused to sign off on the new Constitution until this right was guaranteed by amendment.

I challenge you to study the writings and work of James Madison and you will find that his original intent was to insert this right into Article I, Section 9 between Clauses 3 and 4.  This is where we find the topic of Individual Rights covered.  If Madison believed and intended that this right was “collective” he would have inserted it in Article I, Section 8 where Congress’ powers over the militia are detailed.  The original wording of Madison on this issue was: “that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, a well-armed and well-regulated militia being the best security of a free country, but no conscientious objector shall be compelled to render military service in person.”  He meant it to be clear that this was an INDIVIDUAL RIGHT.

Therefore, for all who support “gun control”, “gun confiscation”, or “gun bans” and argue that the Constitution is outdated and the second amendment is a dinosaur law and so archaic that it needs to be removed from our document and trashed, I argue from history you are wrong!  The Second Amendment is not simply an 18^th-century idea who time has expired it is timeless because it codifies a natural or inalienable right.  There is nothing unclear about this right or the wording in the Constitution. I suggest that if they win and take from us the Second Amendment Right they will take from us all other Rights including the First and Fourth Amendments and effectively makes us slaves to the whims of the State and the governance and oversight of Big Brother.

This is one of the many reasons I will vote NO on the Democrats in November and vote YES on the Republican because, at this point, the Republicans are not at war with our Inalienable Rights and give us a better pathway to reclaiming our Republic.  Disagree if you please, but NEVER accuse me of trashing my principles by voting for a candidate who may not fully embody those characteristics I hold dear as a Christian.  I am VOTING YES on America and I believe that is a very principled thing to do.  Allowing the Liberal Leftist Democrats to regain power would be to take steps backward that I do not believe we can afford.  I don’t care what anyone calls me, that is my position and it is rooted in Prayer, my Faith in God, my belief and love for America, and my desire to remain Free!

God bless you and God bless America!