Our Founding Fathers called it the “biblical right to self defend,” but you and I know it as the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution. As a matter of reference, it reads, “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.” With that in mind, here is what one of my favorite authors, David Barton, has to say about it:
In the case of the Second Amendment, the Founding Fathers didn’t call it the right to keep and bear arms the way it’s written; they called it the ‘biblical right of self defense.’ So the ultimate goal of the Second Amendment is to make sure you can defend yourself against any kind of illegal force that comes against you, whether that’s from a neighbor, whether that’s from an outsider, whether that’s from your own government. And in the case of the American revolution, if the Founding Fathers had not been able to take on that illegal British government coming in…so for them, it’s not a matter of, ‘oh you got too many bullets in your magazine.’ It’s whatever the government’s got we’ve got to have the same thing, because if they’ve got an AK47 and we’ve only got a BB gun, this is not a deterrent. So the whole purpose of the Second Amendment is to make sure you have equal power with whatever comes against you illegally. So at that point, that has gotta control the gun debate.
In his book, The Second Amendment, David Barton argues that the it is supposed to be a deterrent against our own government. According to Barton, any weapon the government possesses must be available to citizens. Period. Why shouldn’t you be able to blow up tanks and armored cars, especially if the second amendment was designed to protect us against a larger governmental-based tyranny?
Well, if you like this thinking and are looking for not only the questions, but the answers, then David Barton’s book “The Second Amendment” should be on this month’s reading list. Enjoy.
