Constantine's Sidearm has been on a very long hiatus. This is mostly due to the fact that it seemed as if we were preaching to the choir about most things; our readers are all very much in sympathy with our views. But perhaps it is time for a different outlook: the need for us, and our readers, to disseminate information to a larger audience. Evangelize, as it were; try to bring more people into the fold, by making known the news and events that Mainstream Media (Make-Believe Media, Motherf*cking Media, etc.) refuse to cover in their effort to keep the proletariat ignorant and docile. The 2012 elections will be here before we know it, and HUGE changes need to be made across the board. So, without further ado...
Later today, Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker will sign legislation that will legalize the concealed carrying of firearms in that state, the 49th to do so. That leaves Illinois as the only state in the union that does not allow American citizens to exercise their constitutional rights. The fundamental Right in question time and again has been legally proven to be an individual right, not a collective one. Common Sense ought to tell us that, as every other amendment in the Bill of Rights is inherently an individual right, but Common Sense is as foreign to most people these days as dactylic hexameter. As such a right, it should be beyond the power of any government body, federal, state, county, local, whatever, to impinge upon. And yet Illinois does, selectively and vindictively. Why do we allow this?
"A well regulated militia, being necessary to a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
Your Spectral Cavalier has explained this before, but for clarity's sake let us go through it again:
1. A well regulated militia does not mean a National Guard. Nor does it mean a strictly controlled and monitored civilian police force. A militia is a body of citizens called together in times of emergency or unrest who are then disbanded after the disturbance has been dealt with. It is not a standing force. In the parlance of the Founding Fathers, "well regulated" meant "well supplied" or "well equipped", and the citizens were expected to be self-sufficient in that regard. They were expected to have their own firearm, powder and shot. It was the driving concept behind our famous Minutemen: within one minute of getting the call, citizen soldiers were expected (and able, for the most part) to grab their gun and their gear and start heading toward the muster sight/battlefield.
2. Notice how the authors of the Constitution made a point of saying "necessary" to a free state. They didn't say "handy", or "not a bad idea", or "couldn't hurt"...they said "necessary". As in, "We definitely NEED this." Why do we NEED it? To protect us against foreign kings being dicks, dirtbag zealots trying to blow things up, and our own government getting all uppity and trying to run our lives for us. The government is supposed to work for us: that is why we are citizens, and not subjects.
3. The "right of the people" means just that: people, i.e. individuals. Not groups or armies or even militia: the PEOPLE. You and me. The knuckleheads who continue to pay galling taxes to support the re-elections of assholes who don't give a shit about anything other than their cut of said taxes.
Every other amendment in the Bill of Rights refers to individual right, not a collective one. So why should the 2nd Amendment be any different? To say the Framers meant otherwise is ludicrous. It's #2 for crying out loud, not #10 or "*see below".
4. The concept of keeping and bearing arms should be pretty self-explanatory, but apparently it is not. So let's make it simple: "keep and bear" means "own and carry". It does not mean "purchase after an extensive, restrictive and overly complicated process and then store unloaded and locked up in a safe where you can't get to it if you need it."
5. "Shall not be infringed" means, quite frankly, "don't fuck with this". Glaringly straightforward.
I've heard all of the arguments against private ownership of guns, and they're all daft. Not to mention unconstitutional. The adage that "guns don't kill people, people kill people" is absolutely true. A firearm is a tool, not a sentient being (well, for those of us of a more mystical bent, perhaps they are, but I digress). Restrictive firearm laws lead to higher crime rates: that is a proven fact. The highest crime rates in the United States are ALL in areas where the gun laws are the most restrictive. Why? Because the only thing accomplished by those laws is the removal of self-defense. Criminals by definition do not abide by the law, so restricting or outlawing guns does not affect them: it only affects their prey.
Here's one anti-gun mantra I love: "If everybody has guns, the whole country will turn into the Wild West!" Well, no it won't. It hasn't happened in places where ordinary citizens are allowed to carry firearms; crime rates in those areas have fallen steadily over the last 25 years. Plus, not everyone likes to carry a six-shooter in a custom leather rig, so it wouldn't be the case even aesthetically. (Personally, I'd love to walk around with a single-action Colt .45 on my hip, but I'm weird that way.)
How have the gun bans in Great Britain and Australia worked out? By all accounts, horribly. Sift through some non-MSM websites and see for yourself.
But hey, Ghost Knight, man...if we got rid of ALL the guns, we could just groove on peace and love all the time, you dig? Well, ignorant hippie...you're an idiot. Put down the bong, stop hugging the tree for a second, and OPEN YOUR G*DDAMNED EYES! Run your peace & love rap by some islamic nutjobs and see how they respond.
The Second Amendment is our concealed carry permit, people. It's high time those in power remember that.
Send the word.
No comments:
Post a Comment