The Second Amendment and the "right to privacy"
I've heard "gay rights" and "women's rights" activists say Roe v Wade ensures our "right to privacy." What hooey!
The Constitution does not guarantee any inherent "right to privacy." Why did the Founding Fathers omit the "right to privacy?" For two reasons: one is that society can and will and is entitled to proscribe private behavior deemed detrimental to society; the second is that it's almost impossible to enforce a "right to privacy" especially nowadays when even our private cell-phone records are for sale.
The Founding Fathers may well have taken the "right to privacy" for granted as one of our "unenumerated rights" but they also knew that the only "privacy" which could be enforced had necessarily to be enforced by the person protecting his privacy - and definitely not the government which by its nature is intrusive and disrespectful of privacy.
In other words privacy can only really be protected by force which is why I think that the Second Amendment should really have been the First Amendment. The Second also trumps the First in that one's right to "free speech" is a lot easier to act on when armed to the teeth.
The Fourth Amendment is the closest we get to a "right to privacy" and the only really practical way to be secure in our "persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures" is to be armed which is why I believe every home should have at least one reliable gun for protection.
I do not expect any "right to privacy" outside of my home (which in our inherited English Common Law is my castle although I don't need a moat and a drawbridge nowadays if I am well-armed.) I regard phone calls and the internet as "outside my home" because I have little control over them. Cars are also "outside of my home" because they are difficult - both legally and practically - to protect against intrusion.
I live as if everyone already knows everything about me - and try not to do anything that I will be ashamed of. But the commercial intrusion gets my goat. I say we start a jihad against these unethical intruders - and spammers also. I've just added cellphone pirates to my list for when the revolution comes.......
At least we have a "right to bear arms." The Second Amendment would read like this if written in modern language: "The right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed because a well regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state." In other words, don't mess with the citizens' right to bear arms because we need to be proficient at using them at all times - a militia without experience is useless.
If guns are made illegal then only criminals will have them - think Nazi Germany - where the only people who had guns (after Hitler had confiscated all private guns) were psychopathic sadistict thugs and killers in government issued uniforms.
Government is always a necessary evil and needs to be limited - seriously limited; it's getting a bit out of hand and we need another Coolidge or Reagan to take more naps on the job and wake up clear-headed and ready to boogie in their own inimitable ways. I never trust anyone without a sense of fun; in other words sociopathic criminals, commies, nazis and islamic totalitarianists.
The Constitution does not guarantee any inherent "right to privacy." Why did the Founding Fathers omit the "right to privacy?" For two reasons: one is that society can and will and is entitled to proscribe private behavior deemed detrimental to society; the second is that it's almost impossible to enforce a "right to privacy" especially nowadays when even our private cell-phone records are for sale.
The Founding Fathers may well have taken the "right to privacy" for granted as one of our "unenumerated rights" but they also knew that the only "privacy" which could be enforced had necessarily to be enforced by the person protecting his privacy - and definitely not the government which by its nature is intrusive and disrespectful of privacy.
In other words privacy can only really be protected by force which is why I think that the Second Amendment should really have been the First Amendment. The Second also trumps the First in that one's right to "free speech" is a lot easier to act on when armed to the teeth.
The Fourth Amendment is the closest we get to a "right to privacy" and the only really practical way to be secure in our "persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures" is to be armed which is why I believe every home should have at least one reliable gun for protection.
I do not expect any "right to privacy" outside of my home (which in our inherited English Common Law is my castle although I don't need a moat and a drawbridge nowadays if I am well-armed.) I regard phone calls and the internet as "outside my home" because I have little control over them. Cars are also "outside of my home" because they are difficult - both legally and practically - to protect against intrusion.
I live as if everyone already knows everything about me - and try not to do anything that I will be ashamed of. But the commercial intrusion gets my goat. I say we start a jihad against these unethical intruders - and spammers also. I've just added cellphone pirates to my list for when the revolution comes.......
At least we have a "right to bear arms." The Second Amendment would read like this if written in modern language: "The right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed because a well regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state." In other words, don't mess with the citizens' right to bear arms because we need to be proficient at using them at all times - a militia without experience is useless.
If guns are made illegal then only criminals will have them - think Nazi Germany - where the only people who had guns (after Hitler had confiscated all private guns) were psychopathic sadistict thugs and killers in government issued uniforms.
Government is always a necessary evil and needs to be limited - seriously limited; it's getting a bit out of hand and we need another Coolidge or Reagan to take more naps on the job and wake up clear-headed and ready to boogie in their own inimitable ways. I never trust anyone without a sense of fun; in other words sociopathic criminals, commies, nazis and islamic totalitarianists.
posted by Joubert at 7:25 AM
The Alliance
<< Home