Second Amendment Infringement

blog

Posted by Connor on July 26th, 2006

The U.S. Senate just passed a bill to ban the confiscation of citizens’ guns during a declared emergency.

Why, pray tell, is this even being considered in our legislature?

Citing the constitutional right to bear arms, Vitter said that during an emergency people should be allowed to hold onto “legally possessed firearms to defend your life, your property” at a time when telephone lines and cell phones probably are not operating and victims “can’t reach out to law enforcement authorities.”

Well, duh. That’s why we already have the second amendment. It is unconstitutional, and therefore illegal, for law enforcers to confiscate a weapon that a citizen has a right to “keep and bear” (own and use).

And now Senator Kennedy, champion of liberal causes, has declared his opposition to this bill. Kennedy would like you to surrender your constitutional rights during emergencies.

Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-MA) charges [that] a Republican-backed amendment that prohibits the confiscation of guns during an emergency puts police officers and first responders in danger.

Sounds to me like the same idea behind the Patriot Act and similar legislation that imposes on individual rights in an attempt to secure the community as a whole. Prophetically and wisely did Benjamin Franklin say: “They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

Did you enjoy this article? Read Latter-day Liberty!

***************

Related Posts (automatically generated)

2 comments so far. Care to chime in?

Leave it up to uncle Teddy to run rough-shod over our rights!

I love the bumper-sticker that reads: “Ted Kennedy’s car has killed more people than my gun”; or “I’d rather hunt with Dick Cheney than ride with Ted Kennedy”. These are great lines.

#1 Wade | July 27th, 2006 7:30 PM

I think Kennedy is nuts if he thinks that I am gonna give up my guns to the police or whoever it is when an emergency has occured. We have constitutional rights for a reason.

#2 Brian Trowbridge | September 14th, 2009 1:35 PM