Bearable Arms – What’s Good for the Goose is Good for the Gander
Local governments, state governments, and especially the federal government would like you to believe that it can enjoy the use of bearable arms technology and simultaneously imprison citizens for enjoying the same. This notion is an affront to the very core of the 2nd Amendment – the citizens’ ability to maintain self-governance. To allow government-paid soldiers, agents, and officers to bear arms that are restricted to citizens is to create a police state by standing army and “reduce [the People] under absolute Despotism.”
Recent court battles have the government fervently seeking to classify features, parts or components, and accessories that make up bearable weapons systems as “not bearable arms” in and of themselves, and therefore not protected by the 2nd Amendment. These features, parts or components, and accessories are commonly use not only by the People but by the government itself! They represent modern bearable arms technology – the natural and organic evolution of technology – and are absolutely protected by the 2nd Amendment! They are not protected because they are in common use – for such a flawed idea would essentially freeze technology at any given point (new technological innovations are never “in common use”).
If one were to accept this reasoning – that modern gun technology can be banned piece-by-piece but enjoyed by the government nonetheless – one would also have to accept completely analogous reasoning applied to other enumerated rights. One would have to accept that the First Amendment only applies to Gutenberg printing presses, quill pens, and standing on a platform and speaking with one’s voice while also holding that the government may use the Internet, broadcast television, social media, cellular notifications, and loudspeakers. The contention is as absurd as it gets. The government may also not freeze the technology of the People to a point in time, such as requiring us to use dial-up modems to access the Internet while they use wireless and fiber optic connectivity.
Perhaps government actors would also propound that the 1st Amendment only protects religions in common practice at the time of the founding of the nation or that video cameras and audio recording devices may not be used by the public to document government employees, but government employees may enjoy the use of these to monitor, track, and prosecute citizens. Only fools and tyrants would accept these arguments.
We will spell it out plainly for everyone: The 2nd Amendment protects an inherent, innate birthright of all men and women. This right is to own (keep) and possess (carry) reasonably discriminate and reasonably safe weapons technologies for the purpose of self-protection or self-defense, collective defense, and self-governance.
We are not advocating for the individual possession of atomic bombs or other large bombs. We are not advocating for dangerous and unusual weapons such as guns with multiple barrels pointing multiple directions. We are recognizing a clear right of all people to own common military or better-than-military grade rifles, pistols, shotguns, and the like with all modern accessories and features and components. What is good for infantrymen in the military is good for the public. The 2nd Amendment would be pointless by any other interpretation. The framers did not pen it so they or a future generation could behold the slaughter of the People by an army with superior weaponry. Indeed, the colonists enjoyed better-than-military grade arms technology while they fought and bested the British military.
Here we prove that “bearable arms” includes the modern and constantly-evolving arms technology of the infantryman. Arms may not be artificially reduced to the public in any manner whatsoever. The piece-by-piece dismantling of the 2nd Amendment must not be tolerated in any court. Grips, stocks, guards, sights, suppressors, magazines and other feeding devices, lasers, and everything else are protected for reasonably discriminate weapons systems. Select-fire automatic weapons (machineguns) are protected. These are all weapons systems able to be wielded and used reasonably for defensive purposes due to their discriminate nature. While they may also be misused, that is the interest balancing that was performed by the framers of the US Constitution. A society which surrenders these rights shall, indeed, be subjugated to severe abuse by a ruling class and its obedient order-followers. An well-armed society is a free and safe society overall, whereas a disarmed or insufficiently-armed society is neither free nor safe.
We encourage the use of language from this article to promote the universal human right and duty to arms. Please link and provide credit to this article and contact us to let us know of your use. Thank you.
