While clearly expressing the fundamental right for an individual to own and carry a firearm in defense of them self and others, and declaring an armed populace to be necessary to the maintenance of a free republic, both in the Constitution and the writings of the founding fathers, it remains flawed. The flaw? There is no avenue provided for the application of an armed opposition to an oppressive and corrupt governing body without incurring criminality. There in lies the flaw, and there in lies the necessity. When armed revolt becomes the necessary, and history shows that it usually does, means of countering tyranny, how does one implement the Constitutional Provision without becoming a Domestic Terrorist? In effect we posses a gun with no ammunition. In less of course, we were to win.
Winners get to declare who’s right and wrong.
Lesson: Fight to win.
Winning isn’t everything. It’s the only thing. -Vince Lombardi
Hello and welcome @Jan16
AKA, the “Whiskey Rebellion”.
@Jan16 Welcome to the community!
I think the checks and balances of the three branches of government and periodic elections of representatives are supposed to be the balm to calm these fears and to quell the actual occurrence of tyranny.
One significant irritant in contemporary perspective is that the elections are problematic. I mention here a microscope on the fake Russia dossier, the public spectacle of the DNC sliming Bernie out of the primaries in favor of HRC, the question of the authenticity of the 2020 election culminating in a(nother) date that will live in infamy, and more (like the Kavanaugh confirmation hearings, I could go on). All and never-ending story after story are combining to cast a huge shadow over the legitimacy of the government in place, the actions and inactions being taken on the world stage, and they loudly imbue all the high-level, nationally visible participants with reasons to be suspected of harming our republic.
So there’s another election upcoming. Maybe THAT’ll fix it!
Oh, and maybe watching Mel Gibson in “The Patriot” will encourage you about the chances of success!
The only flaw in the 2A that I see is the prefatory clause about militias that in modern times seems to trip up some of the pro self defense people and give false hope to the anti self defense people that the entire 2A is no longer valid since the “Militia” was supposedly morphed into the National Gaurd.
The active clause stating the uninfringable right of THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms is the only part that matters.
What those people do with those arms is a matter for themselves to decide. Though those that choose to use their arms to infringe upon the rights of others are likely going to get some arms directed back at them.
Who writes our history?
As I look at it when we were going to separate ourselves from England, we were the domestic terrorists, we were the rebels against the crown.
By whose viewpoint is history writing from?
As I see it, it would be from what our government wants us to see our history as.
The story you know of from wars gone by are different from many points of views. What one person experiences is different from others and then there is the reason for the war. There are usually multiple reasons for wars.
Let’s look at the January 6th
was it just a protest?
was it an insurrection?
was it to overthrow the government?
was it the beginning and the end of a revolution?
was it an attack upon our country?
That does rather come to mind.
Jan Sigurd Helligso
Windy Pine Log Homes LLC
Contractor # WINDYPL83801
Hope and prepare.