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.’”
Trump announces two-year closure of Trump Kennedy Center for major renovations
NYPD officers save choking 2-year-old boy, bodycam video shows
Government shutdowns may be fewer, but they’re increasingly disruptive
Trump considers legal action against Michael Wolff and Epstein estate after latest document release
What Tyler Robinson’s defense wants hidden and why prosecutors and media say no in court
‘Christ or Chaos’: Former Pastor of Invaded Minneapolis Church Has a Message for America
How Activists Embed Leftist Ideology in K–12 Schools
Deputy attorney general says ‘I don’t know’ why Gabbard was present at Georgia FBI raid
Senate Republicans push for House GOP rebellion against funding package, voter ID legislation
From Rodney King to Spitting and Kicking Alex Pretti, the Left’s Flawed Hero Worship Never Changes
Former Planned Parenthood Worker Gives Haunting Account of Her Past Work
Melania Trump’s $8 million opening best documentary debut in over 10 years
What Trump’s next pick to lead the Federal Reserve means for your wallet
Homan Snaps Back at CNN Reporter Accusing ICE of Instilling ‘Fear’
Trump Drops Massive $10B Lawsuit on IRS, Treasury for Leaking His Tax Info
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.
Trump announces two-year closure of Trump Kennedy Center for major renovations
NYPD officers save choking 2-year-old boy, bodycam video shows
Government shutdowns may be fewer, but they’re increasingly disruptive
Trump considers legal action against Michael Wolff and Epstein estate after latest document release
What Tyler Robinson’s defense wants hidden and why prosecutors and media say no in court
‘Christ or Chaos’: Former Pastor of Invaded Minneapolis Church Has a Message for America
How Activists Embed Leftist Ideology in K–12 Schools
Deputy attorney general says ‘I don’t know’ why Gabbard was present at Georgia FBI raid
Senate Republicans push for House GOP rebellion against funding package, voter ID legislation
From Rodney King to Spitting and Kicking Alex Pretti, the Left’s Flawed Hero Worship Never Changes
Former Planned Parenthood Worker Gives Haunting Account of Her Past Work
Melania Trump’s $8 million opening best documentary debut in over 10 years
What Trump’s next pick to lead the Federal Reserve means for your wallet
Homan Snaps Back at CNN Reporter Accusing ICE of Instilling ‘Fear’
Trump Drops Massive $10B Lawsuit on IRS, Treasury for Leaking His Tax Info
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.
