Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. Attributed to Benjamin Franklin. Do we understand what it means? .Can we think of an example to show the validity of that understanding?
The founding fathers have to be admired, as politicians they understood only to well what all governments are capable of. That any government given a free hand without control and monitoring at the lowest level would usurp control.
The constitution was written to affirm the rights citizens deserved and had fought for for so long. To safeguard as much as possible but realising that governments would still find ways of circumventing any law or restrictions to afford as a last resort the ability to reject governments anti-social objectives.
The Constitutions second amendment serves to legally restrict government and as a reminder to citizens of the duty they have. It affirms the right to arms suitable for their defence that is an expression of the natural right of self defence. It condones absolutely no infringement under any circumstances.
The founding fathers were under no illusion any Constitution or Constitutions clause served as protection or that a legal approach was the only approach. Clearly it was realised that citizens served as the protection who if need be must have the ability to resist any government attempts to remove their rights. The rights are what need citizens protection, not the Constitution or any other law.
Yet today we have the common misconceptions that governments are benign and there to serve us. That government will do this without oversight, control or any checks. Citizens must trust government who will do them no harm or wrong.
There are more than 20,000 firearm laws despite the Constitutions emphatic “shall not be infringed”. What were citizens thinking of when each of these were introduced? What persuade citizens that their duty to protect their rights was not required? What persuaded citizens that they were helpless and unable to object? What persuaded citizens that any infringement of their rights were reasonable and justified? Why did government feel confident that citizens would accept all these laws and obey them?
Is this an example of what Franklin said? When we no longer protect our rights and instead accept that our rights may be infringed if we receive safety which is temporary in return? We bluff ourselves we are protecting the Constitution and we can still own guns so have protected some guns and given little away. Our safety is still claimed intact, our rights all but forgotten because we think that being allowed to own a firearm by a benevolent government is all we need.
The founding fathers words of advice and warning all but forgotten. Protect the laws, protect the constitution and your rights are no more. Are we safe and there is nothing to fear from government? Can government be trusted?