Second Amendment rightsTo the editor:
What does the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which is part of the Bill of Rights, say?
The amendment reads: A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. These 27 words have a deeper meaning after reading about the loss of the right to bear arms in Restoration England.
The right to keep and bear arms was as rare in old England as it is today. The right of English subjects to own weapons was not asserted in the Magna Carta, or in The Petition of Right.
Since the 13th century, English citizens not only had been permitted but also were obliged to own weapons. This was essential to their fulfilling the variety of police and military functions expected of them. The subjects were required to practice on Sunday afternoons in the village greens and any other time they had free.
Until 1642, the custom of being able to bear arms was considered a nuisance rather than a privilege. The residents, around the year 1642, found themselves caught up in a civil war between Charles I and the Parliament. Those traumatic events made the people of England aware of not merely the value of owning arms, but also the need for private ownership. During those times the private ownership of weapons was to be defended and throughout that period the number of weapons in both public and private hands soared.
During the times of private ownership, English subjects were involved in everyday police work as well as being in the militia. The Old Common Law custom was that whenever a crime occurred, citizens were to raise a hue and cry to alert their neighbors and were to pursue the criminal. Those subjects who refused or preferred not to get involved (Democrats) were liable to fine and punishment.
During the reign of Charles I, the Catholics were pressured not to have private weapons. Ever since the English Reformation they had been regarded as potential subversives. Those subjects who were allowed to keep weapons had an obligation to be skilled in their use.
When Charles II came to reign, the people did not need to keep weapons and the king wanted only his loyal people to be armed. An order was put out to prevent persons known or suspected of disaffection to the king from meeting and/or stockpiling weapons; the kings men were to confiscate any arms or munitions found in their possession.
After reading about what happened in England I can understand much better how our forefathers could see where a government hell bent on taking away our right of private ownership of weapons could do so without the Second Amendment.
In October 2004 at The Kings College in the United Kingdom, Wayne LaPierre, the executive vice president of the National Rifle Association debated a very sly Rebecca Peters of the International Action Network on Small Arms (IANSA). Peters was instrumental in the removal of private ownership of arms in Australia in 1996. She is now trying to convince the United Nations that our Second Amendment Right goes against the rights of the world.
Peters is a very dangerous person because she does not use facts; she twists the facts and uses deceit. After the debate a licensed gun owner asked Peters about the turning in of handguns by the people of the United Kingdom. Her response was: I think, yes, times change. I know it (pistol shooting) used to be a sport that was allowed in the United Kingdom and it is no longer. Im sad for you. I suppose if you miss your sport, take up another sport.
This person is very condescending and has only one agenda: to take away our rights.
As Americans and Republicans, we must keep informed about what our legislators are doing and not let what happened in England and many other countries happen here.
Rebecca Peters is the head of IANSA and she was working under a grant from the George Soros Foundation.
James R. Stone
Secretary of the Spirit of 76
Republican Gun Club
http://www.oscnewsgazette.com/index.php?option=news&task=viewarticle&sid=11339.
