CLAIM: During the Wednesday night CNN town hall Democrat presidential hopeful Joe Biden claimed the Founding Fathers did not intend for “everyone” to own guns.
VERDICT: False. The purpose of the Second Amendment was to be sure the citizens at large were armed in order to defend their lives and liberty.
Biden began his comments by suggesting that “no amendment is absolute,” adding, “None of you can stand up on the First Amendment, free speech, and yell ‘fire’ in here [or] you’ll be arrested.”
He then transitioned to Second Amendment rights, saying, “From the very beginning the Founder[s] said, ‘Not everyone is able to have a gun and you can’t have any weapon you want.’”
AOC tells New Yorkers to ‘pull up’ to Alabama during rally speech behind bulletproof glass
White House Shooter Dead After Secret Service Returned Fire
Feds subpoena Hasan Piker, Medea Benjamin over Cuba trips
BREAKING: White House Lawn Evacuated – Shots Fired – VIDEO
Gunman dead after opening fire near White House checkpoint, Secret Service says
Trump says Iran deal ‘largely negotiated’ as 84-day war nears possible end
Newsom declares state of emergency in Orange County as failing chemical tank nears catastrophic explosion
Breaking: US-Iran Peace Deal Nearly Reached
RFK Jr announces ‘largest autism fraud bust in American history’ with $46.6M Medicaid scheme indictment
US Army hits 2026 recruiting goals four months early, Pete Hegseth announces at West Point commencement
Breaking: Kyle Busch’s Family Reveals Cause of Death
EXCLUSIVE: Trump-backed military vet mocked for disability ahead of Memorial Day: ‘Most shameful thing’
What One Illinois Town Says About The Current State Of America
Instant Noodle Product Recalled After Life-Threatening Allergens Detected
Castro indictment fuels speculation Trump may be reviving Maduro playbook against Cuba
Contrary to Biden’s claims, the purpose of the Second Amendment was to be sure the citizens at large were armed in order to defend their lives and liberty. Moreover, the Founding Fathers wanted broad gun ownership in order to give teeth to the militia, should it have to be called together. This is why the phrases “well-regulated militia” and “the right to keep and bear arms” compliment each other, rather than cancel out one another, in the text of the Second Amendment.
Alexander Hamilton’s Federalist 84 is very informative here, inasmuch as Hamilton argued that natural rights are exoteric in nature, the possession of all mankind, and therefore so broadly possessed and understood that a bill of rights to protect them was unnecessary. He went so far as to warn that a bill of rights would be dangerous because it would give the government the impression that it could take action against all aspects of freedom that were not protected by explicit amendments and/or enumerations.
AOC tells New Yorkers to ‘pull up’ to Alabama during rally speech behind bulletproof glass
White House Shooter Dead After Secret Service Returned Fire
Feds subpoena Hasan Piker, Medea Benjamin over Cuba trips
BREAKING: White House Lawn Evacuated – Shots Fired – VIDEO
Gunman dead after opening fire near White House checkpoint, Secret Service says
Trump says Iran deal ‘largely negotiated’ as 84-day war nears possible end
Newsom declares state of emergency in Orange County as failing chemical tank nears catastrophic explosion
Breaking: US-Iran Peace Deal Nearly Reached
RFK Jr announces ‘largest autism fraud bust in American history’ with $46.6M Medicaid scheme indictment
US Army hits 2026 recruiting goals four months early, Pete Hegseth announces at West Point commencement
Breaking: Kyle Busch’s Family Reveals Cause of Death
EXCLUSIVE: Trump-backed military vet mocked for disability ahead of Memorial Day: ‘Most shameful thing’
What One Illinois Town Says About The Current State Of America
Instant Noodle Product Recalled After Life-Threatening Allergens Detected
Castro indictment fuels speculation Trump may be reviving Maduro playbook against Cuba
Hamilton wrote, “I go further, and affirm that bills of rights, in the sense and to the extent in which they are contended for, are not only unnecessary in the proposed Constitution, but would even be dangerous. They would contain various exceptions to powers not granted; and, on this very account, would afford a colorable pretext to claim more than were granted.”
Story cited here.
