Jake says at 10:25: “At that time, colonial America, the phrase ‘well regulated’ meant ‘well functioning.’ … ‘Well regulated militia’ is a militia that functions effectively. … The founders knew that for a body of people to remain free they needed to have an armed militia.”
Jake quotes founding father, Richard Henry Lee:
“A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves, and render regular troops in a great measure unnecessary. …to preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them.” [Additional Letters From The Federal Farmer, 169 (1788)]
Jake quotes words from the chief architect of the Constitution, James Madison, which is actually put together from these two quotes:
“(The Constitution preserves) the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation… (where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.” [The Federalist, No. 46]
“The right of the people to keep and bear… arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country….” [I Annals of Congress 434, June 8, 1789]
From the video’s comments
I wrote:
The NRA, Fox News, Ted Nugent and others don’t tell the real reason for the 2nd Amendment, so most people don’t understand the purpose for high capacity magazines. It’s not about hunting, but is a deterrence for government to know they cannot become tyrannical.
I mentioned this to Ted Nugent when he was at the Alaska State Fair. He told me: “that’s the only reason, period” — but that’s still not how he talks in public. A few hours later, I watched Ted on stage, turn around and swing his butt at us, wagging an attached foxtail.
Jake is asked in a comment:
Jake, I’m a Christian and I believe in the 2nd amendment but can you please show me where in the bible it says we have the right to have a gun ?
Jake responds:
Considering the Bible was written thousands of years before the invention of guns, you and I both know that the Bible doesn’t have a passage that discusses gun rights.
The Second Amendment does not specify the right to have guns anyway. It references the right to “bear arms”.
The word “arms” originated from the Old French word “armes” and was adopted into Middle English. The definition of the word meant “weapons of a warrior.”
So, while there is no mention of “guns” in the Bible, there is ample reference to various arms. One example is Luke 22:36 where Jesus tells his disciples, “if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one”. And with reference to the general principle of having the right to defend one’s own property by force, Exodus 22:2 says: “If a thief is caught breaking in at night and is struck a fatal blow, the defender is not guilty of bloodshed”.
The principle of the innate right to self-defense is well established jurisprudence that has been consistent for thousands of years. The right of defense of one’s own life, property and the lives/property of others through the use of force includes the right to possess the means to carry out that self-defense. As property ownership is a God-given (or natural) right, the ownership of arms to defend one’s property is an attendant inalienable right.
• • •
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKikFznMyfI
How to Talk to People About Preserving Gun Rights – HD
Published on Mar 29, 2018
anarchyst
The problem is, we have allowed the anti Second Amendment crowd to define the terms.
A firearm is a tool which possesses no evil intent on its own. Assigning intent to an inanimate object is the epitome of insanity. Demonizing a weapon on “looks alone” also marks the accuser as an unstable individual who is also insane. Call them out on their illogic and insanity.
Another dirty tactic the anti-Second Amendment crowd uses exposes children to potential and actual harm by putting them in “gun-free zones”. These people care not one wit about children, but uses them for their own nefarious purposes.
We need to TAKE BACK the argument…
When the antis blame the firearm for the actions of a criminal, state that: “a firearm is an inanimate object, subject only to the intent of the user. Firearms ARE “equalizers” and are used to preserve life and make a 90 lb. woman equal to a 200 lb. criminal”.
When the antis attempt to justify their “gun free zones” counter their misguided argument with “you mean, criminal safety zones” or “victim disarmament zones”.
State that “we protect our money, banks, politicians and celebrities, buildings and facilities with PEOPLE WITH GUNS, but protect our children with “gun-free zone” signs”.
When the antis criticize AR-15s in general, counter with: “you mean the most popular rifle of the day, use able by even the smallest, weakest person as a means of self-defense. Besides, AR-15s are FUN to shoot”. Offer to take them to the range and supply them with an AR-15, ammunition and range time. I have made
many converts this way.
When the antis state that: “You don’t need an AR-15 to hunt with”, counter with “AR-15s ARE used for hunting, but in many states, are prohibited from being used to take large game because they are underpowered”.
When the antis state that: “AR-15s are high powered rifles”, correct them by stating that “AR-15s with the .223 or 5.56mm cartridge are considered medium-powered weapons–NOT “high-powered” by any means”.
When the antis state that: “you don’t need and AR-15”, counter with, “Who are YOU to consider what I need or want?”
When the antis state that: “the Constitution was written during the time of muskets, and that the Second Amendment should only apply to “weapons of that time period”, state that: “by your logic, the First Amendment should not apply to modern-day telecommunications, internet, television, radio, public-address systems, books and newspapers produced on high-speed offset printing presses. Only “town-criers” and Benjamin Franklin type printing presses would be covered under the First Amendment”.
When the antis state that “only law enforcement and government should possess firearms”, remind them of the latest school shooting, as well as Columbine, where “law enforcement” SAT ON THEIR HANDS while children were being murdered, citing “officer safety”, afraid to challenge the shooter, despite being armed to the hilt. The government-run murderous sieges at Ruby Ridge and Waco are also good examples of government (mis)use of firearms. Let’s not forget the millions murdered under communism by their governments AFTER their firearms were confiscated.
This tome can be used to counter any argument against any infringement of our Second Amendment.
Jeff Fenske
When the antis state that: “You don’t need an AR-15 to hunt with”, tell them the real reason for the 2nd Amendment.