The Mark of a Free People
The Second Amendment is not about Deer Hunting
History is prologue. A little prologue is necessary to understand my staunch defense of the Second Amendment.
Tyrannical governments have consistently disarmed populations to consolidate power. Ancient Rome and feudal Japan restricted civilian access to weapons. The 20th century witnessed several instances of tyrannical governments disarming their populations, such as Adolf Hitler's Germany and Joseph Stalin's Soviet Union. These oppressive regimes realized that an unarmed citizenry was less capable of resisting their authoritarian rule.
History also bears witness to the indomitable spirit of an armed populace, ready to confront tyranny and maintain an unwavering hold on our freedoms. Despite ongoing debates and controversies, the essence of the Second Amendment remains unwavering: it grants individuals the power to defend themselves, their loved ones, and the very core of our constitutional republic, serving as a formidable force against any encroachment on our liberty.
The second amendment reads: "A well-regulated militia, being necessary for the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
There have been many infringements. The National Firearms Act of 1934 is a back-door gun registration and illegal tax on select small arms. The Gun Control Act of 1968 is an import ban on certain handguns and the ability to order a firearm by mail. The Firearm Owners "Protection" Act of 1986 is a law that was SUPPOSED to protect various sportsmen and hunters while traveling across state lines with their firearms as well as to protect Federally licensed dealers from senseless ATF audits. Still, instead, it is used to harass many gun shop owners out of business for no reason. While undoubtedly well-meaning, these laws have had dangerous repercussions for many law-abiding gun owners.
Short Barrel Rifles and Short Barrel Shotguns (SBRs and SBS were included in the National Firearms Act, and handguns (later removed from the bill) due to their ability to be concealed in trench coats during prohibition. Infringement of the Second Amendment aside, this would later go on to violate the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) by disallowing law-abiding gun owners suffering from physical challenges to purchase and use a smaller, safer, and easier to handle rifle or shotgun without paying an over-inflated and illegal tax. Later, a few firearms accessory manufacturers got creative and produced stabilizing arm braces for AR and AK-type pistols to make them more accessible and safer for disabled war veterans and individuals born with physical ailments to use their otherwise legal firearms for target shooting, hunting game animals, and defending their homes. The ATF initially approved these pistol braces for sale before quickly "changing their mind" again for the 5th or 6th time and interpreting pistols equipped with stabilizing arm braces as short barrel rifles. Now, many law-abiding gun owners, including those with severe physical disabilities, face felony charges if caught with an AR or AK-type pistol with a stabilizing brace equipped.
Restrictive gun laws are an infringement. I intend to change that. As your Congressman, I will fight to protect our right to keep and bear arms. I will seek to hold the ATF accountable by enforcing the Firearm Owners Protection Act's restrictions. ATF FFL audits are limited to only one per calendar year (they've been violating this law regarding auditing and record-keeping for years). No more photocopies or taking pictures of Form 4473's during these audits (illegal registration and database collecting). I would also be in favor of repealing the National Firearms Act of 1934, the Gun Control Act of 1968, and eliminating the ATF's illegal and unconstitutional pistol stabilizing arm brace ban. I would also seek to limit federal funding for states that undermine the Supreme Court’s Bruen decision by requiring written permission from property owners to carry lawfully concealed handguns that make CCW permits useless.
The Second Amendment stands as a resolute reminder that our liberties are not to be trifled with. It is a fierce assertion that we shall never be defenseless against threats, whether from abroad or within our own government. In the oath of office, Congressional members swear to protect and defend the Constitution. That means protecting the Second Amendment and fighting against such infringements.
Thank you for posting this write-up Eddie. Glad I met you at the Tampa gun show!
While I was reading through this, I could tell you're a gun guy. There are many politicians that claim to be pro Second Amendment, but cannot articulate many of the points you've made or get into the weeds about various infringements such as the NFA or GCA. I've seen too many Republicans contradict themselves by saying they're for the Second Amendment, and then express support for infringements like the NFA or some of the ridiculous rules the ATF makes up.
I look forward to you challenging RINO Vern!
The Second Amendment is a necessary safeguard against government tyranny. It ensures that citizens can protect themselves, their families, and their property in the face of aggression, both from common criminals and from a potentially oppressive government.
"Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of."
— James Madison
The Second Amendment can be used as a defense of all the other Amendments, but its primary purpose was to protect citizens' right to bear arms, which was seen as essential to the maintenance of a free and democratic society.
Thank you for writing this piece.