The Second Amendment, white papers and Trump
WASHINGTON, Nov. 29, 2015 – For reasons that escape me, presidential candidates feel compelled to release policy “white papers” in serial installments as resume submissions to an unserious press in an effort to prove their seriousness.
But Trump’s second white paper won’t be getting any thumbs-up from the Fourth Estate’s “nattering nabobs of negativism.”
“Our Founding Fathers knew, and our Supreme Court has upheld, that the Second Amendment’s purpose is to guarantee our right to defend ourselves and our families. This is about self-defense, plain and simple,” said Trump.
But this particular document got the lefties at Politius USA to write, “Trump’s Second Amendment position papers are a white gun nut’s wet dream.”
You have to hand it to lefty websites. Their honesty is refreshing when compared to the mainstream media’s phony claims of “unbiased” reporting.
“In Trump’s white supremacist world,” wrote Politius USA’s senior editor Hrafnkell Haraldsson, “white folks with guns can do no wrong.” Although white himself, something tells me Haraldsson outwardly expresses his emasculating Political Correctness by voluntarily disarming himself.
At a time of hyper racial identity in today’s Obamamerica, Haraldson’s hyper passivity is surely music to the ears of Black Lives Matter, which believes the statement that says, “All lives matter” is a white supremacist’s rallying call.
But, as philosopher John Locke asked, “Must men alone be debarred the common privilege of opposing force with force, which nature allows so freely to all other creatures for their preservation from injury? I answer: self defense is a part of the law of nature, nor can it be denied the community, even against the king himself.”
“The law of nature.” Where have I heard that before?
I seem to recall that Thomas Jefferson, riffing off Locke, wrote that we Americans should “assume, among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them.”
He further extrapolated that mixing a healthy dose of self-preservation with a love of liberty means “that all men are created equal.” And getting back to Locke, “All mankind… being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty or possessions.”
That is why our Constitution enshrines our Second Amendment natural right in the Bill of Rights, which says to the political majority (that’s you and your elected representatives), “The right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”
People on the left, at least on the surface, appear to have a healthy sense of self. They are very loud when, as Locke says, they attempt “to get another man into his absolute power.”
But free men and women can take consolation in the fact that those on the left, loud and obnoxious though they may be, aren’t all that big into self-preservation.
Otherwise, why would the chronically unarmed – those susceptible to deep psychic wounds at the mere manifestation of micro aggressions – believe they have the stones to take an estimated 310 million guns from Americans who believe, like Locke, that “no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty or possessions”?