DC v. Heller was not a victory for gun owners

In fact, even anti-gun people should be very afraid of the precident that this ruling sets. The supreme court ruled (by the narrowest of margins) that owning a gun is an individual right…BUT Justice Scalia ruled that the government has the right to regulate which guns you can own, how you are to store them, where you can carry them, who can own them (via background checks), etc.

According to this ruling, even the most anti-gun states like California and Illinois are not violating the constitution.

Can you imagine if they had ruled this way on any other right? “Yes the first amendment lays out an individual right to free speech, freedom of the press, and religious freedom, but we maintain the right to regulate those rights.”

How long before we have people advocating for ‘common sense speech laws’?

This ruling will only confuse people further on the nature of our rights. Our rights pre-exist government. They are not granted by government because people existed before it. Our rights are natural or God-given. The constitution does not grant us our rights it protects them from the government. The constitution is not a document handed down from the government to the poeple stating “These are the rights that we see fit to give you.” It is a document writen by the people to the government saying “These are the privileges that you will have an no more. And whatever you do with those privileges, they can never violate these enumerated rights.”

The govenment has no legitimate power to regulate the types of guns we own or the way we store them, or where we carry them. Not only does the constitution not lay out that power for them, it specifically prohibits them from doing it in the second amendment.

That’s why it is nonsense for the Supreme Court to rule that “‘The right to own guns can’t be meddled with at all’ means we can meddle with your right to own guns as we see fit as long as you are still able to own a gun.”

And thus the Supreme Court throws us a small insignificant bone to keep us from revolting as they eviscerate our rights in front of our eyes. It’s really quite brilliant. In the months leading up to the ruling, many conservatives were on the verge of deciding to give up on the government and work towards true liberty, pending this decision. They wanted to see if the system was still worth saving or not. And now because of this ruling they are shouting “See? The federal government can be saved as long as we elect the right leaders!”

They don’t understand that this is the ruling that they were dreading. The only solution is dissolution. It’s time to begin throwing off the federal government (nonviolently of course). Peaceful secession is the only way to begin restoring liberty for ourselves.

I’ll leave you with a quote:

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another…a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

-The Declaration of Independence

P.S. According to the PATRIOT Act, and other new national security laws, I am now legally a terrorist for advocating exactly what our founding fathers advocated when they founded this country.

Does that seem right to you?

About these ads
This entry was posted in Are We Free?, Civil Disobedience, Constitution, downsize dc, fascism, free market, Guns, History, Patriotism, Personal Liberty, Politics, Secession, taxes, Thought Crime, war, war on terror and tagged , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to DC v. Heller was not a victory for gun owners

  1. Mike Vine says:


    This should have been the newswire summary of that decision.

    Instead, the socialists were licking their wounds because they didn’t get a judgement to suspend all recognition of the right to bear arms.

    The only state, I believe, with full recognition of this right is Vermont – which is conveniently located next to the Free State!


  2. robert says:

    the right to free speech for now! what about the fairness doctrine they are trying to pass which will regulate what you can say..

  3. Pingback: Best of DontTreadOnMike: Most Offensive « Don’t Tread on Mike

  4. Pingback: Live Free Austin featuring Michael Boldin

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s