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.
Second Amendment, amendment to the Constitution of the United States, adopted in 1791 as part of the Bill of Rights, that provided a constitutional check on congressional power under Article I Section 8 to organize, arm, and discipline the federal militia.
What does discipline the federal militia mean? What does that mean to you? Does that mean the Second Amendment protects us against our own government – if they were to try and take Tyrannical Power, that we have the right to arm ourselves against them?
Do other nations have a Second Amendment?
Certainly, many countries are awash with guns. Among the nations with the most firearms are Serbia, Yemen, Switzerland, and Saudi Arabia.
There are only three countries, however, that have a constitutional right to keep and bear arms: Mexico, Guatemala, and the United States — here’s why.
The Second Amendment 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.” The government may not remove our right to bear Arms.
More than 1,400 Second Amendment challenges have been decided since District of Columbia v. Heller, the landmark 2008 case in which the Supreme Court established an individual right to keep a handgun at home (but also emphasized that the right is subject to various forms of regulation) (google search: has the second amendment been challenged?)
Referred to in modern times as an individual’s right to carry and use arms for self-defense, the Second Amendment was envisioned by the framers of the Constitution.
According to College of William and Mary law professor and future U.S. District Court judge St. George Tucker in 1803 in his great work Blackstone’s Commentaries: With Notes of Reference to the Constitution and Laws of the Federal Government of the United States and of the Commonwealth of Virginia, as the “true palladium of liberty.” https://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/amendIIs7.html
What does that mean exactly? True Palladium of Liberty?
“Wherever standing armies are kept up, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any colour or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction.”
If you do not have the ability to bear arms, your right to liberty is going to be destroyed by the government you elected.
This is so eye opening when you watch what is happening in Australia and Canada. The citizens have no means of protecting themselves against their own government. They are sitting ducks, jumping whenever they are told to jump. Their only question is – how high? They cannot fight back in body, but they have spiritual weapons folks. They have prayer, they have persecution, they have submission to God. They could have the power of their Creator on their side? It’s really a matter of their own God-given choice? Submit or deny?
If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. Romans 10:9
In addition to checking federal power, the Second Amendment also provided state governments with what Luther Martin (1744/48–1826) described as the “last coup de grace” that would enable the states “to thwart and oppose the general government.”
McDonald v. City of Chicago, case in which on June 28, 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled (5–4) that the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which guarantees “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms,” applies to state and local governments as well as to the federal government.
The case arose in 2008, when Otis McDonald, a retired African American custodian, and others filed suit in U.S. District Court to challenge provisions of a 1982 Chicago law that, among other things, generally banned the new registration of handguns and made registration a prerequisite of possession of a firearm.
The next day the National Rifle Association and others filed separate lawsuits challenging the Chicago law and an Oak Park, Ill., law that generally prohibited the possession or carrying of handguns and the carrying of other firearms except rifles or shotguns in one’s home or place of business. Each suit alleged that the law violated the right of individuals to possess and carry weapons, which the Supreme Court had found to be protected by the Second Amendment in District of Columbia v. Heller (2008). (Anticipating this finding, the plaintiffs in McDonald v. City of Chicago filed suit on the same morning that the decision in Heller was announced.)
The crucial question, however, was whether the Second Amendment is applicable to the states and their political subdivisions. Citing “selective incorporation,” the Supreme Court’s gradual application to the states of most of the protections of the Bill of Rights through the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment (which prohibits the states from denying life, liberty, or property without due process of law), the plaintiffs argued that the Second Amendment is applicable through that clause as well as through the amendment’s “privileges or immunities” clause (which forbids the states from abridging the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States). https://www.britannica.com/event/McDonald-v-City-of-Chicago