Sunday, April 5, 2015

Founding Fathers & gun control

Old Hat! Common sense simply....

 1- PROTECT YOURSELF - “Laws that forbid the carrying of arms disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.” — Thomas Jefferson

2- PROTECT YOURSELF FROM GOV"T - The Constitution preserves “the advantage o...f being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation where the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.” - James Madison


3- PROTECT YOURSELF FROM OBAMA - The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power.” — Noah Webster


Famous Quotes From The Founding Fathers On Our Right To Bear Arms


Thomas Jefferson, of Virginia:
“No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.” — Proposed Virginia Constitution, 1776
“Laws that forbid the carrying of arms. . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.” — Jefferson`s “Commonplace Book,” 1774-1776, quoting from On Crimes and Punishment, by criminologist Cesare Beccaria, 1764

George Mason, of Virginia:

“[W]hen the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised by an artful man, who was governor of Pennsylvania, to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them; but that they should not do it openly, but weaken them, and let them sink gradually.”. . . I ask, who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers.” — Virginia`s U.S. Constitution ratification convention, 1788


“That the People have a right to keep and bear Arms; that a well regulated Militia, composed of the Body of the People, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe Defence of a free state.” — Within Mason`s declaration of “the essential and unalienable Rights of the People,” — later adopted by the Virginia ratification convention, 1788


Samuel Adams, of Massachusetts:

“The said Constitution [shall] be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms.” — Massachusetts` U.S. Constitution ratification convention, 1788

William Grayson, of Virginia:

“[A] string of amendments were presented to the lower House; these altogether respected personal liberty.” — Letter to Patrick Henry, June 12, 1789, referring to the introduction of what became the Bill of Rights

Richard Henry Lee, of Virginia:

“A militia when properly formed are in fact the people themselves . . . and include all men capable of bearing arms. . . To preserve liberty it is essential that the whole body of people always possess arms… The mind that aims at a select militia, must be influenced by a truly anti-republican principle.” — Additional Letters From The Federal Farmer, 1788
James_Madison_by_Gilbert_Stuart

James Madison, of Virginia:

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

Tench Coxe, of Pennsylvania:

“The militia, who are in fact the effective part of the people at large, will render many troops quite unnecessary. They will form a powerful check upon the regular troops, and will generally be sufficient to over-awe them.” — An American Citizen, Oct. 21, 1787
“Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American . . . . The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.” — The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788
“As the military forces which must occasionally be raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirmed by the next article (of amendment) in their right to keep and bear their private arms.” — Federal Gazette, June 18, 1789

Noah Webster, of Pennsylvania:

“Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power.” — An Examination of The Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution, Philadelphia, 1787
Alexander_Hamilton_portrait_by_John_Trumbull_1806

Alexander Hamilton, of New York:

“[I]f circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude, that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little if at all inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their rights and those of their fellow citizens.” — The Federalist, No. 29

Thomas Paine, of Pennsylvania:

“[A]rms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. . . Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them.” — Thoughts On Defensive War, 1775
4795007871

Fisher Ames, of Massachusetts:

“The rights of conscience, of bearing arms, of changing the government, are declared to be inherent in the people.” — Letter to F.R. Minoe, June 12, 1789
 


Elbridge Gerry, of Massachusetts:

“What, sir, is the use of militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty. . . Whenever Government means to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise a standing army upon its ruins.” — Debate, U.S. House of Representatives, August 17, 1789
PatrickHenry

Patrick Henry, of Virginia:

“Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel.” — Virginia`s U.S. Constitution ratification convention
 
You Might Also Like
?
These content links are provided by Content.ad.Both Content.ad and the web site upon which the linksare displayed may receive compensation when readers click on these links. Some of thecontent you are redirected to may be sponsored content. View our privacy policyhere.

To learn how you can use Content.ad to drivevisitors to your content or add this service to your site, please contact us atinfo@content.ad.
Share →

94 Responses to Famous Quotes From The Founding Fathers On Our Right To Bear Arms

  1. “shall not be infringed” is arguably the clearest and most absolute phrase in the entire Constitution.
    • Todd Clarke says:
      “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed” Should we allow felons to have guns?
    • If by “felon”, you mean someone who committed a crime, was incarcerated as punishment, and is now done with that punishment, then yes, felons should be allowed guns. If a criminal is deemed to have “done his time”, then he should resume his place as a citizen in the community. If it is felt that a criminal can never be entrusted again with the rights and responsibilities of a citizen, then he should either be locked away for life or executed.
      • Matt White says:
        The revocation of a person’s second amendment right should only take place in a court of law as punishment for a specific crime and a specific person, or because the person is, due to mental illness, not capable of handling the responsibility of firearm ownership.
        By the same token, said court can and should be able to restore the rights of an individual whom has demonstrated their fitness to exercise the right in a responsible manner.
        Any law which bans a group of people from owning a firearm, is a clear violation of the Second Amendment, and is unconstitutional. The Lautenberg Amendment is such an example.
      • James Daniel says:
        I refer you to the above quote of Samuel Adams-
        “The said Constitution [shall] be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, WHO ARE PEACEABLE CITIZENS, from keeping their own arms.” — Massachusetts` U.S. Constitution ratification convention, 1788
    • Jason Munyer says:
      Hooah on that Scott!
    • Ken Longo says:
      Should ex-felons be allowed to vote?
    • Doug Dobbs says:
      A felony, by definition, is a crime so serious that you forfeit some rights as a citizen in a civil society. You lose your freedom, you lose your right to vote and you lose your right to bear arms. Don’t do the crime, don’t lose the rights.
    • People who think that guns cause crime are childish thinkers. Through out all human history the story of violence is not that there were weapons that did it, but that someone thought that they could do it with not too much cost to them selfs. Violence is encouraged when one person is defenseless. It is the the inadequate distribution of force that encourages violence not the availability of weapons.
  2. Absolutely, it means we should be able to defend and or conquer a govt not doing right by its population.
    • Ken Longo says:
      It means nothing of the sort. See Shay’s Rebellion.
      • Thom Stewart says:
        The right to vote is restored in most, if not all, States at the end of ANY prison term, parole, probation, or other legal restriction of law. The only rights NOT so treated are the 2nd Amendment rights and the right to hold ELECTIVE office. The only exception being a full pardon.
      • Thom Stewart says:
        It means precisely that. You cannot cherrypick odd situations (at least without researching them fully) that fit your personal view, and against all other prevelant evidence. The right to “overthrow” a traitorous domestic leadership is clearly stated in both the Declaration of Independance and the Constitution as well as a multitude of times in the Federalist Papers.
  3. Doug Knox says:
    Duh! What part of “shall not be infringed” don’t people understand?
  4. Don Magnuson says:
    Who ever said those men back then werent educated are full of it. They had thought of everything that could happen way in the future. They were a lot more educated than a lot of idiots are today. We sure wouldnt have a muslim in the WH today if any of them were around
  5. How far we have strayed from the ideals spoken by our founders.
    • Todd Clarke says:
      ” the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed” Should we allow felons to have guns?
    • They will have guns no matter what laws are enacted. “Gun control” disarms the law-abiding, not the law-breaking. Anyone with common sense would understand that instictively.
    • Until the gun control act of 1968 they could. If you look at the statistics every time they have made it harder to own a gun the crime rate has increased which breeds more calls from the gun banners for more restrictions.
      • terry seale says:
        I disagree with the view that once a convict has served his time and been released, he has served his debt to society. That is no where in the Constitution or law. The fact of a felony conviction is as permanent as chicken pox, a college degree, a dishonorable discharge, or parenthood. A “convict” is still a convict when no longer incarcerated.
        I oppose felons being permitted to vote, bear arms, hold office, possess illicit drugs (pot excluded). I oppose the ill-advised and hysterical Sen. Wellstone “OJ Act” that banned gun possession to those convicted merely of misdemeanors or merely civil domestic restraining orders.
        I also oppose most vehemently the statute that denies an arrestee or indicted person on a felony from bearing arms before and until he is convicted of said felony. This happened to me when I needed a firearm to defend against someone who had already shot at me and against whom I was a principal witness.
        The Aussie experiment has been shown quickly to be disastrous with violent crime exploding. I was extremely offended and outraged that the state of MA banned guns right there at Lexington and Concord, where the very Right was first exercised on American soil. As a law-abiding American, I could not bear arms right there under the statue of the Minuteman!
        Look to Switzerland for low crime and responsive democracy, strength, precision, cleanliness, financial stability, high employment and advanced technology. Every Swiss home contains at least one military firearm.
  6. “A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a Free State” is clearly and first and most important part in the second amendment.
    • Tom DiVittis says:
      SMH…….another public school victim?
    • ya..each state is to have there own army/../you see there is a break there..then the right of the people to bear arm’s…’shall not be infringed ‘…most don’t know those last words are a contract seal….binding by law..and they have the same legal weight now as they did then…..this term is still used to date in the U.K. in contract law….
    • Brian says:
      You misunderstand the grammatical context of the whole amendment. The first part that you quote is the preamble; it is the reason or explanation for the second part. They could just have easily left it off and the 2nd amendment would still mean the same thing.
    • Bill says:
      And without the PEOPLE “keep and bare arms” there is NO Militia!!
  7. At that time the populace had the same weapons as the military….to defend itself against a tyrannical government or an invading force
  8. Mike Coombes says:
    Even if the second amendment didn’t exist there are still 9th and 10th amendments
  9. The founding fathers were superior to us in thought. They well read, self-sufficient, lived under the throne of tyranny. They had plenty of time to ponder life’s evils and debate issues. Because they didn’t have fuckin TV. They where thinkers.
  10. Todd Clarke says:
    This is a small percentage of founders you list. do you understand much has changed since then?
  11. ALL gun laws are unconstitutional. See “shall not be infringed”…..
  12. Our founding fathers knew at some point in the future that there would a government such as the one we are living under now. They made sure the American people would be able to defend themselves against a tyrannical government such as the one they broke away from in England. We the people people are our only defense.
  13. We must continually battle to preserve our freedoms from those weak persons who would choose to have an authoritarian government provide security.
  14. Amen. Pretty cut and dried, no mincing of words, and still relevant today. Again shows just how brilliant these folks were to write a document for all ages not just the 18th century.
  15. Tom Spivey says:
    They understood it well, even back then. Liberals STILL haven’t figured it out, after more than two centuries . . .
  16. We should be able to arm ourselves with the same types of weapons our government has in order to keep the government in check and limit their power.
  17. Bob Rafetto says:
    Obama never read any of these quotes.
  18. John Palmer says:
    They saw what happened in England and tried to stop it here.Great men with great insight.
  19. Melissa Gunn says:
    I love it when ignorant people ASSUME what the Founding Fathers meant instead of actually being able to read and understand simple English
  20. D.c. Neufeld says:
    God save us from liberals and crocked politiotins
  21. From our for father’s great and timeless truths
  22. Charles Kerr says:
    What they don’t teach in history class
  23. Ken Longo says:
    The phrase “bear arms” had an entirely different meaning in the late 18th century. Madison and the Founders feared that peacetime standing armies would be a threat to liberty. Given the time in which they lived and their extensive knowledge of 17th and 18th century European history, their fears were justified.
    Therefore, the Founders believed that every adult, American male citizen of sound mind and body had the duty to protect the country and its government. Hence, the “right to bear arms” in service of one’s country in one of 13 state militias. They clarified this intent when they passed the Militia Acts a few short years after the Constitution was ratified.
    The idea that the 2nd Amendment gave Americans the right to overthrow the government, “of the people, by the people”, would have been viewed by the Founders as seditious, especially in the aftermath of Shay’s Rebellion.
    Until 2008, when the conservative majority on the U.S. Supreme Court broke with two centuries of legal precedent, no American court in the land had ever recognized an inherent right to armed self-defense outside of service in the militia. Even then, Justice Antonin Scalia clarified that the rights guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment were far from absolute.
    • wrong you are…go back and hit the history books some more….you got an “F” in today’s class…..
    • Brian says:
      “The idea that the 2nd Amendment gave Americans the right to overthrow the government, “of the people, by the people”, would have been viewed by the Founders as seditious”
      Wrong. Read the Declaration of Independence: “That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”
      • RIchard says:
        Look at the oath of office
        “I, AB, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.”
        Nothing about government in it at all. Does say all enemies foreign and domestic.
        “While the oath-taking dates back to the First Congress in 1789, the current oath is a product of the 1860s, drafted by Civil War-era members of Congress intent on ensnaring traitors.
        In 1789, the 1st United States Congress created a fourteen-word oath to fulfill the constitutional requirement:
        “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States.””
        http://twothirds.us/the-oaths-of-office/
    • Brian says:
      Also your last paragraph is wrong. See:
      1. Presser v. Illinois, 116 U.S. 252 (1886)
      2. Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857)
      3. Duncan v. Louisiana, 391 U.S. 145 (1968)
      4. Bliss v. Commonwealth (1822, KY)
      5. Aymette v. State, 21Tenn. 154, 156 (1840)
      6. Nunn v. Georgia (1 Ga. (1 Kel.) 243 (1846)
      All these decisions refer to the right to keep and bear arms as an individual right that applies to all people, and not just people when members of a militia.
    • Thom Stewart says:
      Your spurious “Research” aside, the meaning then was the same as it is now. The knowledge that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely was understood then and now. What the Revolution did then was to overthrow the legal authoritative government at that time. It was indeed viewed as insurrection by the legal government! That British authority was overthrown! In the ensuring 240+ years more than 2 billion people have lost their freedoms, economies, and lives for lack of “innsurection”.
  24. John Tilton says:
    Something to read and think about.
  25. Thomas Ross says:
    the law of the land!!!!!!!!!!!
  26. Greg Ball says:
    Democrats/ libs want to treat people like they are irresponsible and stupid. If they get their way, they will act just that way
  27. Rob Heber says:
    When they wrote it, private citizens owned battleships!
    • RIchard says:
      TO a point you are correct. Armed merchant ships where allowed and the US government even gave Letter of marque to private ship owners that allowed then to hunt down and sink enemy ships.
      Article 1 Section 8 allows this, and still does today.
  28. We all need to band together and demand the immediate removal of any politically elected officials who would even dare to break their oaths of office buy trying to undermine our Constitution in any way, and abolish any laws that have been slipped in that do!
    If you agree, spread the word!
  29. If anybody is to argue the fact about our right to bear arms after reading what the founding fathers had in mind is an absolute IDIOT
  30. Mark Rossi says:
    Nice selection. Thanks guys.
  31. Carole Rule says:
    Never according to the Constitution and the Founding fathers
  32. Stuart Gibbs says:
    And yet liberals are still confused about what the founding fathers meant with the 2nd amendment.
  33. Stuart Gibbs says:
    And yet liberals are still confused about what the founding fathers meant with the 2nd amendment.
  34. The difference between then then, and us now, they had to fight to have the right to live here. And look what our politicians have done to this country. We need a hanging tree in Washington.
  35. The difference between then then, and us now, they had to fight to have the right to live here. And look what our politicians have done to this country. We need a hanging tree in Washington.
  36. Elbridge Gerry said it best I think
  37. Elbridge Gerry said it best I think
  38. Brian says:
    When our forefathers wrote the Constitution they had no idea where technology would lead us. They wrote it in the time of muskets. They had no idea how weaponry and tactics would evolve. Does anyone really believe that in the day and age we could rise up against the government with our Brownings? The government has drones, cruise missiles, tanks, gunships, bullet proof vests and vehicles. The best thing for us would be to adopt Australia’s system and give up our guns. As unAmerican as that may sound, it will stop violence. Criminals will still have guns for awhile, but they will go away in time. The black market price for guns will skyrocket so that no one will have them. It will save lives and lower crime here just like it did in Australia.
    • Charles says:
      You should do some research. Weapons technology had advanced well past the musket during the time of the Revolution.
    • RIchard says:
      Wrong.
      They had the equivalent to the Gatling gun at the time of the signing of the Constitution.
      James Puckle first built one in 1718.
      Lorenzoni repeating flintlock pistol built in 1680.
      Ferguson rifle First breech loading military rifle. Used by the British at the Battle of Saratoga 1777.
      Girandoni air rifle built in 1779. Used a 20 round magazine. Used by the Austrian army 1780 – 1815
      No they where well aware of the idea of a “machine gun” and magazine equipped firearms.
      y
  39. Moreover: The 1968 Gun Control Act was a “reform” hastily cobbled together as a result of the JFK murder. Inter alia, it forbade the importation of certain guns by physical description. Walther’s PP, PPK, PPK/S, and other “small” guns were banned. So Walther’s US distributor, Sam Cummings, began making them in the US. Much later the models were taken over by Smith & Wesson but the design and features were cheapened and degraded. German-made Walther’s and Mauser Hscs, French Mannurins can be bought and sold federally but not imported.

  40. This alone reveals the stupidity of gun control laws. As Hillary might say, “What difference does it make…” if a firearm is made in America, Germany, France, or Brazil. That is just rather blatant protectionism that would be thrown out by the WTO in more recent times.
    The Walther PPK is really not much smaller or more concealable than Jack Ruby’s US-made Colt Cobra. I understand today that no one can buy a Walther PP series pistol in California even if he is licensed to carry and is a retired policeman.

  41. All gun laws it seems are malum prohibitum, something that is “wrong” merely because the state says so (like overtime parking). They are basically illegitimate because they are unconcerned with laws which are malum per se, something that is evil in itself even if there were not a law against it (like child molesting, larceny, cock fighting, reckless driving).












No comments: