Larry Hicks of the York Dispatch is shocked, shocked that a local politician expressed an understanding of the insurrectionary component of the Second Amendment.
“We must be able not only to hunt but to protect ourselves from an overbearing government that does not do the will of the people,” State Rep. Scott Perry told attendees at a Harrisburg Second Amendment rally last month.
The columnist’s reaction?
“Maybe he got a little bit carried away with himself. Maybe he forgot he’s living in 2011, not 1770.”
So I guess Larry Hicks is wiser than the Founders? Does he really think the Second Amendment is about duck hunting?
This is what the Declaration of Independence has to say:
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.
And in order to make sure they could, the Founders included the Second Amendment as the ultimate last resort guarantor. And they knew that just as arms deter individual assailants, so too does this work at a societal level.
Based on all the idiot edicts they’re trying to pass, the government fears an armed populace. That means the Second Amendment is doing its job as a deterrent, and things can be resolved peaceably, without it having to become a remedy. It’s when they no longer fear an armed citizenry that things will get really dangerous and more likely to heat up.
There are those among us who would decry the right to keep and bear arms as being the product of a different era, as being outdated, no longer relevant, and an actual detriment to life, liberty and happiness in our modern era of “enlightenment.”
Ultimately, what is this “outdated” Second Amendment really about, if not the preservation of a free people when all other options to defend life and liberty have been exhausted? Against all enemies, individual and aggregated, foreign and domestic. Here is where we must face the core meaning of the awesome power and responsibility that this “obsolete” right places squarely in the hands of the people. Because, ultimately, what this right guarantees you is not a gun, but a choice. A choice, in the final analysis, to submit to evil or to fight it, literally.
Hicks has made his choice, the choice of the ignorant and therefore prejudiced, that is, the choice of the “Authorized Journalist.” That he seems surprised that the ability to check tyranny is a component of the Second Amendment is as inexcusably lazy as if he had referred to a semiautomatic police sidearm as a “service revolver,” or a semiautomatic rifle as a “machine gun.” Or cartridges as “bullets.”
And in his ignorance, he just publicly disparaged a better man.
- Monopoly can be a deadly game
The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance airs again this morning on NBC 1260 AM/96.1 FM Scottsdale, AZ at 7:00 a.m. Pacific/10:00 a.m. Eastern and all points around and in-between.
On today’s program:
- Is 2A check on tyranny obsolete?
- Pirate attack on US soil!
- Anti-hunting zealots dealt setback in Congress
- Candidate for Congress wants to repeal Second Amendment
- Special guest Larry Pratt of Gun Owners of America—he had a front row seat at this week’s Gunwalker hearings, and he’ll be telling us what he observed.
And much more. If you don’t live in the Scottsdale area, you can listen live on your computer by clicking here. And I don’t pretend to understand such things because I still use an old steam-powered model, but I’m told you can get free apps for phones and also listen here.
Help wanted–inquire within
Regular readers: If you agree that mainstream press coverage of the gun rights issue demands a counter-balance, please help me spread the word by sharing Gun Rights Examiner links with your friends via emails, and in online discussion boards, blogs, social media sites, etc. Then get more commentary at The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance.