Where Shall Americans Find “True Democracy” If Not In Their Guns?


Where Shall Americans Find “True Democracy” If Not In Their Guns?

Opinion iStock-tracygood1New York – -(AmmoLand.com)- The Deep State & Globalist stooges in Government and in the legacy Press and media cons

[DEEP DIVE] Head Kore 99 Review
Patagonia’s Crazy Light Middle Fork Waders
Best Pellet Smokers of 2022


American Freedom Flag USA iStock/tracygood1

New York – -(AmmoLand.com)- The Deep State & Globalist stooges in Government and in the legacy Press and media constantly talk of “Democracy”— bantering endlessly that only the “Democrat Party” is intent on preserving it. Yet, they never bother to explain what they mean by it, even as they lavish attention on it. But what is really going on here?

These stooges constantly claim they are all for “democracy; and that they and they alone are the only protectors of it. And they dare anyone who might object to what surely comes across as mere pretension when they mention ‘democracy.”

Yet, think about what these imbeciles don’t say when they go on and on about it. They never mention the word ‘freedom’ in association with it. They never mention ‘freedom’ and ‘democracy’ in the same breath. In fact, they don’t mention the word, ‘freedom’ at all. And why is that? Might it be that ‘freedom’ is not something they want; that it isn’t a thing they adhere to, and that it’s not something they wish others to adhere to either.

Why would these “Democrats” object to “freedom,” and why would they vigorously attempt to dissolve man’s natural bond to it? Indeed!

Do you think this might have something to do with their concern over Americans’ exercise of their fundamental natural rights?

In fact, “freedom” is tied up with and inextricably bound to natural laws rights of the people—those that are enumerated in the first Eight Amendments of the Bill of Rights, and those unenumerated rights as exemplified in the Ninth Amendment.

Recall that the Antifederalists demanded that the U.S. Constitution provide explicit expression of the rights of the American people.

The Federalists objected, concerned that, if a Bill of Rights delineated a set certain of specific rights, then a strong, centralized “federal” government might henceforth claim, one day, the natural rights of the American people must be limited to the rights specifically enumerated, and they must ever refrain from asserting an unalienable right that has not been enumerated.

But, the Antifederalists, for their part, knew that, if natural law rights of the people were not explicitly etched in stone, then a strong, centralized federal government could, and would, eventually, invariably, one day deny, to the people, exercise of any right that government did not deign to bestow to them.

Tyranny is the natural state of Government. The history of the actions of governments, regimes, and empires against the populace, going back to antiquity, is laden with evidence of that. The very struggle of America’s colonists, the Nation’s first Patriots, attests to the tenacity, voraciousness, and virulence of Tyranny.

The Antifederalists’ concern has been shown to be entirely reasonable and justified.

For, even as founders of a new Nation struggled to construct a Government that would be able to resist the intrusion of future tyranny, they knew that tyranny would always sit at the doorstep of the Nation. They understood the forces that they had defeated would soon resume the conflict. And the Nation’s Patriots must have contemplated the next attempt to insinuate tyranny would be surreptitious and devious.

Assisted from the outside, they contemplated that malevolent forces would attempt to subvert the will of the people from the inside.

The only hope for America to preserve the gain of freedom won through a Revolution fought more than two centuries ago, is to hold tight to their natural law rights—those rights that the would-be destroyers of our Nation, both inside and outside the Country, have struggled mightily to constrain. These forces know full well that, as long, as Americans have the capacity and will to exercise their natural God-given rights, the Nation cannot fall. Yet, these forces that crush entire nations have made substantial inroads against this Nation in their effort to undercut and, in one case, even curtail exercise of some of those natural law rights.

Americans have all but lost the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. The attack on the fundamental rights of free speech and the freedom of association (an attendant right of freedom of speech) are under siege, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, and has been, for decades, under vigorous assault.

Had these rights not been explicitly delineated, the American people would have lost, long ago, any vestige of their once free Constitutional Republic. Those who presently control Congress and the vast and powerful police, military, and judicial apparatuses of the Executive Branch of Government do not accept the reality and legitimacy of natural law rights. They categorically reject any notion of laws that stand beyond their power to create, modify, and rescind at will. Thus, the Bill of Rights, a set of natural law rights, existent in man before the inception of Government, serves as a perpetual annoyance for them.

The Antifederalists dealt with the thorny issue presented by the Federalists, among them—those who were against the creation of an express, but limited, set of natural law rights—by adding a Ninth Amendment. The Ninth Amendment states, plainly and succinctly that,

“The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

The very presence of the Ninth Amendment buttresses the ineluctability of the first Eight. And the presence of the first Eight points to the illimitability and impenetrability of the essence of the Divine Creator. Through time, the Divine Creator will manifest through man further obligatory, eternal natural law rights that, at present rest, behind the veil of inscrutability that further elucidate the sanctity and inviolability of man’s Spirit and Soul.

And what are the American people to make of the Tenth Amendment? The Tenth Amendment says,

“‘The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.’

The Tenth Amendment is the principal expression of federalism, an assertion that the Federal Government shares power and authority with the States and the people. But it is also an expression of autonomy and sovereignty of the people over Government, both State and Federal. This idea, rarely mentioned, is, nonetheless, made explicit in Justice Clarence Thomas’ well-reasoned and amplified dissent in the case, United States Term Limits vs. Thornton, 514 U.S. 779 (1994).

The case involved whether the people of Arkansas can amend their State Constitution concerning the State’s electoral process. In a close decision, the majority opinion, penned by now retired Associate Justice John Paul Stevens, and joined by Associate Justices, Kennedy, Souter, Ginsburg, and Breyer, ruled the people of Arkansas do not have that right!?

Chief Justice Rehnquist, and Associate Justices Scalia, O’Connor, and Thomas vociferously disagreed.

Discussing Justice Thomas’ reasoning, who penned the dissent, the author of the law review note writes, in pertinent part,

“Thomas contends that all power stems from the people of the states and that ‘reserved’ powers therefore include all those not specifically granted to the federal government in the Constitution. . . . Justice Thomas reasons that the ultimate source of the Constitution’s authority is the consent of the people of each individual state. Further, ‘because the people of the several States are the only true source of power . . . the Federal Government enjoys no authority beyond what the Constitution confers: the Federal Government’s powers are limited and enumerated.’” “Term Limits and the Tenth Amendment: The Popular Sovereignty Model of Reserved Powers, 29 Loy. L.A. L. Review 1163 (April 1996), Vince Lee Farhat.

Although this topic of elections and electoral process would seem abstruse as discussed in the above-referenced law review note, it is of paramount importance in the upcoming midterm elections in November 2022, and it has implications for the rights of the American people.

It boils down to this:

The would-be Destroyers of the Nation realize that they need a few more years to complete their agenda—involving further destabilization of society, dissolution of the Nation’s institutions, and the dismantling of the Republic, for its eventual inclusion in a supra-transnational governmental structure embracing the world.

To obtain time, these Destructors must maintain firm control over the electoral process in the upcoming election. The liberal-wing of the U.S. Supreme Court knows this as well, and their rulings in the Arkansas case suggests a desire to defeat the doctrine of Federalism, underlying the Tenth Amendment, and their rulings also underscore the liberal-wing’s contempt for the notion that the American people remain the sole true sovereign over all Government, State, and Federal.

Anti-American forces have already stolen one U.S. Election, undermining the great strides made during the Trump years to impede the Clinton/Bush/Obama Globalist agenda that had severely weakened the security of the Nation and undermined the sovereignty of the American people.

Americans must not allow these malignant forces to waylay the 2022 midterm elections, as well.

About The Arbalest Quarrel:

Arbalest Group created `The Arbalest Quarrel’ website for a special purpose. That purpose is to educate the American public about recent Federal and State firearms control legislation. No other website, to our knowledge, provides as deep an analysis or as thorough an analysis. Arbalest Group offers this information free.

For more information, visit: www.arbalestquarrel.com.

Arbalest Quarrel

Source Link