Last year (2020) saw a lot of very interesting changes in America, and the repercussions haven’t yet finished showing themselves.
One big change is that a much larger portion of Americans have become open to the idea of teaching their children at home than had previously been the case. Or, at least, they want to have a much closer watch on what their kids are learning because they overhear the video classes that their kids are subjected to.
I say that this is a good thing. We can discuss many reasons why this can be a good thing, but one primary reason that I say that is because it’s more difficult for your children to be taught lies when you’re paying attention.
Take, for example, a textbook in Texas which summarized the Second Amendment for students. The problem? They summarized it in way that it meant something different than the Second Amendment actually says. Edmund DeMarche writes,
Parents at a high school near Dallas say the authors of a book on U.S. history misfired when they defined the Second Amendment — and now one of the book’s co-authors says the book is being revised.
The work book used at Guyer High School in the city of Denton, “The United States History: Preparing for the Advanced Placement Examination,” includes the “summary” definition of the Second Amendment to include the right to “keep and bear arms in a state militia.”
The edited definition is seen by gun-rights advocates as an affront to the Second Amendment, which states in full: “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.”
Keep in mind that this is an AP (Advanced Placement) textbook for a class in which the student can take a test for college credit. You’d think that they’d get it right. Unbelievable.
Fortunately, to correct any educators who misread the Second Amendment and summarize it incorrectly for students, here are comedians Penn and Teller to clarify this for them (pardon the single swear word at the end of the video):
That’s right, the Second Amendment has nothing to do with arming militias. The Second Amendment has to do with arming everyday citizens to defend themselves against their governments who are already armed (and need to be armed to defend against foreign invaders). In other words, the existence of state militias is one justification for arming ordinary citizens to be able to defend themselves against the government. The armed citizenry was for the purpose of keeping governments and state militias in check.
While it’s been said that comedians are often the ones telling the truth when no one else will, it’s a sad commentary on too much of the educational establishment today when the “college level” education textbooks can’t get something this simple and straightforward right.
Wow! You really are incredibly stupid. As Einstein said, “The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has it’s limits”
A commercial on tv says that “Anything is Possible.” They’re wrong – a liberal with common sense is impossible.
Our Founding Fathers wanted the People to be armed. Here are some quotes from them to prove it
John Adams: Arms in the hands of citizens may be used at individual discretion… in private self-defense.
Samuel Adams: “That the said Constitution shall 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 peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms.” ( in Phila. Independent Gazetteer, August 20, 1789)
Alexander Hamilton: “The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed.” (“The Federalist Papers”. Book by Alexander Hamilton, essay No. 69, 1787 – 1788.)
AND “…that standing army can never be formidable (threatening) to the liberties of the people, while there is a large body of citizens, little if at all inferior to them in the use of arms.”
AND “If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no recourse left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government.” (“America’s Founding Documents: The Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confederation, the United States Constitution, the Federalist Papers, and the Bill of Rights”, p.199, First Avenue Editions)
Patrick Henry: “Are we at last brought to such a humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our own defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in our possession and under our own direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?”
AND “The great object is, that every man be armed…Every one who is able may have a gun.” (Speech of June 14, 1788)
AND “Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined.
AND “The people have a right to keep and bear arms. ”
Thomas Jefferson: “The Constitutions of most of our states assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves, in all cases to which they think themselves competent, (as in electing their functionaries executive and legislative, and deciding by a jury of themselves, both fact and law, in all judiciary cases in which any fact is involved) or they may act by representatives, freely and equally chosen; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; that they are entitled to freedom of person; freedom of religion; freedom of property; and freedom of the press.” (Letter to John Cartwright, June 5, 1824)
Note this one part of the above quote: “that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed;”
I have more, but I think this is a representative sample.
Thank you. A+++
AND “If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no recourse left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government.”
“freedom of person”
Some favorites…
.
2 nd. Amendment “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.”
“A WELL REGULATED MILITIA, BEING NECESSARY TO THE SECURITY OF A FREE STATE, ( breath ) ( the definition of MILITA = ” a military force that is raised from the civil population ” there was no standing army , in the 1700’s that was every one from 16 to 60 . ) THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS, ( the people are the last defense against enemies foreign or domestic ) SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.”
You are right. Standing armies have had a bad reputation over the centuries for rising up and taking control if they didn’t like what they saw. As far back as the Roman Empire, it was the army that decided who would be Emperor. Our Founders wanted “citizen soldiers” who would stand up for We The People instead of a few government officials. Our Second Amendment is vital and the Third tends to back this up. Consider that if we were barred from owning AR’ and limited to muskets then if a soldier wanted to be a permanent “house guest” then a private citizen with a musket would be powerless against a soldier with an M-16.
Comments are closed.