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.’”
Autistic 1st Grader Chomps Sandwich Into Harmless Shape Liberals Hate, Points It at Another Student, Gets Suspended
Rand Paul Announces Vote to Hold Fauci in Contempt After Hearing
Rand Paul seeks contempt charges after Fauci invokes Fifth Amendment more than 70 times
Red state governor pummeled online after defying Trump’s deportation orders
Fact Check: No, Trump Did Not Wire Money to Epstein 4,700 Times
Watch: Fauci’s Attorney Ejected from Senate Hearing for ‘Disrupting Proceedings’
Close call at Atlanta airport forces Delta anti-collision alarms to sound
Fauci repeatedly pleads Fifth in fiery showdown with Rand Paul
Dispatch audio released in Michigan family murder-suicide as troubled family’s secrets emerge
WATCH: Battleground Democrat called Iowa a ‘backwater’ over transgender athletes ban
Iran Releases Sick Video Showing Terrorists How to Target Melania, Suggests Neuro Toxin Strategy, Then Takes Aim at Barron
The Electoral College Must Be Protected: Here’s Why
‘Tip of the iceberg’: NJ illegal voting scandal explodes with more key systems at risk
Coercion Is the Abortion Debate We Aren’t Having
Scientists who nominated Fauci for prize money received millions in NIAID funding
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.
Autistic 1st Grader Chomps Sandwich Into Harmless Shape Liberals Hate, Points It at Another Student, Gets Suspended
Rand Paul Announces Vote to Hold Fauci in Contempt After Hearing
Rand Paul seeks contempt charges after Fauci invokes Fifth Amendment more than 70 times
Red state governor pummeled online after defying Trump’s deportation orders
Fact Check: No, Trump Did Not Wire Money to Epstein 4,700 Times
Watch: Fauci’s Attorney Ejected from Senate Hearing for ‘Disrupting Proceedings’
Close call at Atlanta airport forces Delta anti-collision alarms to sound
Fauci repeatedly pleads Fifth in fiery showdown with Rand Paul
Dispatch audio released in Michigan family murder-suicide as troubled family’s secrets emerge
WATCH: Battleground Democrat called Iowa a ‘backwater’ over transgender athletes ban
Iran Releases Sick Video Showing Terrorists How to Target Melania, Suggests Neuro Toxin Strategy, Then Takes Aim at Barron
The Electoral College Must Be Protected: Here’s Why
‘Tip of the iceberg’: NJ illegal voting scandal explodes with more key systems at risk
Coercion Is the Abortion Debate We Aren’t Having
Scientists who nominated Fauci for prize money received millions in NIAID funding
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.
