2nd Amendment or Not, We’re Keeping Our Guns

On January 20, 2020, an impressively peaceful gun-rights rally took place in Richmond, VA, when gun owners showed up armed in order to oppose the legislation that plans to restrict access to firearms in the state of Virginia. It is estimated that around 22,000 protesters attended the rally, according to the Virginia Division of Capitol Police.

Virginia’s governor, Ralph S. Northam, declared a state of emergency, basing his decision for doing so on what the Virginia government called on their website “credible threats of violent extremism.” Just another Charlottesville episode, perhaps? Nope. Not even close! Not one single bullet was fired. The only thing that did backfire was the misconstrued accusation that guns bring more violence.

In the face of the harmful and derogatory notion that anyone with a gun is dangerous and that guns divide us as a nation, the thousands of men and women who stood in Richmond shattered these stereotypes. They proved actions speak louder than words as people from different genders, races, cultures, and socio-economic backgrounds shined a light on the fact that guns do not inherently generate more violence. Furthermore, it also highlighted that one’s right to protect oneself is rooted in diversity and a commonality that we all share, no matter our differences.

What the entire nation witnessed was a clear message that not all laws are just or even enforceable, especially when they are a threat to liberty. After all, the world has not yet seen unarmed individuals dethrone any tyrant during times of upheavals. Thus, any government’s attempt to disarm its own citizens should be seen as a suspicious act.

With or without the Constitution, we have the right to defend ourselves and the ones we love.

The truth of the matter is our right to bear arms supersedes any political or legal document ever written by any human. The idea that our right to bear arms depends on governmental approval is a foolish misconception. No one needs the government or another person to grant them the moral right of legitimate self-defense they are born with. So the message must be clear, gun rights do not come from the Second Amendment, they preexist this constitutional concept.

There is no doubt that our Founding Fathers knew that the right to defend ourselves from any domestic or external threat was so important that it needed to be included in the Constitution. However, the Second Amendment exists not to tell individuals that they are allowed to bear arms, since that is implicitly expressed in our Constitution as a natural right, but rather it is in place to remind the government that it does not have the right to take away the means through which individuals can defend themselves.

Nevertheless, it is an undeniable truth that as individuals we have the natural right to defend ourselves against others. The government does not have the capacity or means to protect every individual living within its borders; it is objectively impossible. Therefore, it is not a privilege, but a right for every citizen to have the choice to defend themselves against evil actions and criminal activities, whether they are committed by private individuals or a government authority.

Regardless of one’s political proclivity toward left or right, every elected politician should undergo at least a basic philosophy and constitutional law class where they are taught that political opinions do not give them the authority to destroy natural rights that precede the Constitution itself.

The correct question isn’t why do we want to own guns, but why would anyone want to try to take them away?

It is not just that we care about our right to bear arms in order to protect ourselves and our loved ones. It is also that we question anyone’s motivation for trying to stop us from being able to do so. Absolutely no one has the legitimacy to take away someone’s right to self-defense. Thus, when politicians try to enact a law that takes away our natural right to bear arms under the excuse of societal protection, all that is left is the maximization of a nation’s inability to stand up against any sort of governmental threat. If Venezuelans, Cubans, and North Koreans were as well-armed as Americans are, would they still be at the complete mercy of appalling state control that has caused the death of thousands of individuals through waves of terror, famine, and violence?

Something that is deeply rooted in any liberty movement is the love for peace and the wish that people be left alone undisturbed so that they can live life according to their own principles. So it is highly unlikely that a plot to start a new civil war is taking place among the gun rights activists, especially when many of these activists, if not all, truly believe in the NAP (Non-Aggression Principle).

However, if a boogaloo ever becomes a possibility, the best way to avoid it is for the government to just leave people alone, more specifically the ones not committing crimes. This protest was merely a peaceful way to show the government that the Gadsden flag’s motto gladly still stands. In fact, “Don’t tread on me” has finally, in this case, become not a threat but a warning about what well-armed men can do. If you have any questions about it, perhaps it is time you go ask the British what happened in 1776.

Subscribe on YouTube

Helio Flanagan Veiga

Brazilian professor and researcher in the interdisciplinary areas of Law, Political Science, and Economics. Member of the Libertarian Party and the Ludwig von Mises Institute. Libertarian Activist. Founder of the Facebook page “O Libertário” (The Libertarian). Freedom lover.

View Full Bio

4 comments

Your email address will not be published.

  • Every gun law is the result of the people’s failure to control it’s government from violating the Constitution and their oath. We the people are a complacent entity for which the government has instilled fear. We watch as our fellow American Citizens pay tremendous fines and lose their freedom by being locked up for simply exercising their right to bear arms. We watch because we are afraid to get involved. Our government will take away our freedoms, take us from our families, bankrupt us and destroy our lives if we don’t comply. Why would we want to defend our neighbor, our rights and our freedoms? The cost is too high and we fear the consequences. We are controlled subjects and whatever rights we think we have, are nothing but government granted privileges that can be taken away at will.

  • Perhaps copies of this article should be sent to each and every politician in the Federal government, the State governments and City governments, to remind them of the existing laws already in place that exist to protect the people from the government.

  • Add these comments to be printed out as with th HD above article, and sent to every politician holding every political office in the land.
    ******************************************
    From comments on another post.

    ” ***LOOK UP 18 US Code 242 Deprivation of RIGHTS UNDER COLOR of LAW!!!

    Unalienable RIGHTS are BIRTH RIGHTS (NO MATTER the SKIN COLOR) and CANNOT be TAKEN EXCEPT by FORCE FROM ANOTHER HUMAN or a VIOLENT/CORRUPT/TYRANNICAL Government!!!!

    “The very purpose of a Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials, and to establish them as legal principles to be applied by the courts. One’s right to life, liberty, and property, to free speech, a free press, freedom of worship and assembly, and other fundamental rights may not be submitted to vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections.” – US Supreme Court, West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette

    The right of a citizen to bear arms, in lawful defense of himself or the State, is absolute. He does not derive it from the State government. It is one of the “high powers” delegated directly to the citizen, and is excepted out of the general powers of government. A law cannot be passed to infringe upon or impair it, because it is above the law, and independent of the lawmaking power. Texas Court Decision Cockrum v. State, 24 Tex. 394, at 401-402 (1859)]

    The 2nd Amendment GUARANTEES OUR CHILDREN the RIGHT to LIVE and BE PROTECTED by CITIZENS of the US of A Bearing Arms at ALL TIMES!!! That is ONLY a PART of the REASON for WANTING the 2nd Amendment to be HONORED like ALL the Amendments ARE MEANT to be HONORED!!!

    YOU DECIDE!!

    NO STATE may convert a RIGHT into a PRIVILEGE and require a LICENSE or FEE for the exercise of that RIGHT!!! Please see MURDOCK vs. PENNSYLVANIA, 319 U.S. 105, and if a STATE does erroneously do require A LICENSE OR FEE for exercise of the RIGHT, the Citizen may IGNORE THE LICENSE AND OR FEE and exercise the RIGHT WITH TOTAL IMPUNITY!!! Please see SCHUTTLESWORTH vs. BIRMINGHAM 373 U.S. 262. YOU CAN NOT BE PUNISHED FOR THE EXERCISE OF A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT!!! Please see MILLER vs. UNITED STATES 230 F.2nd 486. You have a PERFECT DEFENSE TO THE ELEMENT OF WILLFULNESS if you rely on the advice of Counsel or upon a DECISION OF THE UNITED STATES.

    YOU and I and EVERYONE has the RIGHT to LIFE, LIBERTY and SELF DEFENSE!!!

    In 1856, the U.S. Supreme Court (South v. Maryland) found that law enforcement officers had no duty to protect any individual. Their duty is to enforce the law in general. More recently, in 1982 (Bowers v. DeVito), the Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit held, “…there is no Constitutional right to be protected by the state against being murdered by criminals or madmen. It is monstrous if the state fails to protect its residents… but it does not
    violate… the Constitution.” Later court decisions concurred: the police have no duty to protect you.

    “And that the said Constitution never be 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 peaceful citizens, from keeping their own arms; to raise standing armies, unless when necessary for the defense of the United States, or of some one or more of them; or to prevent the people from petitioning, in a peaceful and orderly manner, the federal legislature, for a redress of grievances; or to subject the people to unreasonable searches and seizures of their persons, papers or possessions.”- Samuel Adams, Massachusetts Ratifying Convention, 1788 Federalist Papers!!!

    TRAINING and USE is a PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY ISSUE!!!

    Under the SUPREME LAW of the LAND (The Constitution and BoR); EVERY LAWFUL CITIZEN of the US of A has the INALIENABLE RIGHT to CARRY in ANY State or TERRITORY of the US of A WITHOUT ANY FEE or PERMIT as the FEE or PERMIT makes it a PRIVILEGE and NOT a RIGHT!!!

    **NOTE the NO STATE or GOVERNMENT MAY CONVERT a RIGHT SECTION of MY COMMENT!!!

    MAKE the SO CALLED Gun LAWS PUNISH the CRIMINAL or MANDATE TREATMENT for the EMOTIONAL People and STOP the ASSAULT ON THE Constitution and BoR and We the People (YOUR EMPLOYER)!!! “

Featured Product

Join Us

Donate