Second Amendment is not license for treason, armed revolt [View all]

[meow2u3]

Jay Bookman
Second Amendment is not license for treason, armed revolt

8:12 am January 17, 2013, by Jay

According to some, the primary purpose of the Second Amendment is to ensure that citizens have enough firepower to overthrow the federal government, should it become necessary to do so. If the government ever loses its fear of such a revolt, the theory goes, our liberty ends and tyranny begins.

Let me be blunt: That is mythological claptrap. But like a lot of mythological claptrap, it can push weak-minded people — the Timothy McVeighs of the world — to do stupid and dangerous things.

It is certainly true that when the Second Amendment was drafted back in the 18th century, it was plausible to believe that an armed citizenry could be a check on overweening government power. Back then, there wasn’t much difference in the weapons available to private citizens and the weapons available to the military. It could have been, and sometimes was, a more or less even fight.

Today, that is no longer the case, and it hasn’t been the case for a century or longer. Around the world, governments have access to a range of weaponry that private citizens have no hope of matching or withstanding. There is simply no comparison between the brute, deadly force that a government can wield and that wielded by private citizens, individually or collectively. Technology has rendered that aspect of the Second Amendment a dead letter.

http://blogs.ajc.com/jay-bookman-blog/2013/01/17/second-amendment-is-not-license-for-treason-armed-revolt/?cxntfid=blogs_jay_bookman_blog

The 2nd Amendment guarantees a militia designed to quell insurrections, not start them. Those traitors who think the 2A gives them license to rebel against legitimate government are the enemy within and should be treated as such.