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.’”
How House Democrats revamped their college outreach in a bid to win back youth voters
Rubio called back to the campaign trail after Texas visit
Husband arrested in wife’s disappearance after family kept getting mystery texts
Mystery woman arrested in American’s death after manhunt in Costa Rican tourist destination
Trump’s unusual legal gambit against Biden-era deportation rule pays off at Supreme Court
Mike Collins drops Election Day gas price prediction in heated Georgia Senate race
Watch: Dramatic Extra-Innings Comeback Extends World Series
RINO Lisa Murkowski Crosses Party Lines to Endorse Democrat for Alaska Governor
Voters who helped Trump win in Michigan are having second thoughts
At least 30 dead in crash between 2 trains in central Spain
Major companies abandon SPLC’s ‘hate groups’ screening tool in corporate giving programs
Five states with youth transgender medicine and sports on the ballot: What to know
Inside Melania Trump’s secret diplomatic role in the Russia-Ukraine ceasefire deal
Deep in Trump country, a new generation reveals the divide behind Texas’ tight Senate race
Federal judge rules Bill Essayli unlawfully serving as de facto US attorney in California
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.
How House Democrats revamped their college outreach in a bid to win back youth voters
Rubio called back to the campaign trail after Texas visit
Husband arrested in wife’s disappearance after family kept getting mystery texts
Mystery woman arrested in American’s death after manhunt in Costa Rican tourist destination
Trump’s unusual legal gambit against Biden-era deportation rule pays off at Supreme Court
Mike Collins drops Election Day gas price prediction in heated Georgia Senate race
Watch: Dramatic Extra-Innings Comeback Extends World Series
RINO Lisa Murkowski Crosses Party Lines to Endorse Democrat for Alaska Governor
Voters who helped Trump win in Michigan are having second thoughts
At least 30 dead in crash between 2 trains in central Spain
Major companies abandon SPLC’s ‘hate groups’ screening tool in corporate giving programs
Five states with youth transgender medicine and sports on the ballot: What to know
Inside Melania Trump’s secret diplomatic role in the Russia-Ukraine ceasefire deal
Deep in Trump country, a new generation reveals the divide behind Texas’ tight Senate race
Federal judge rules Bill Essayli unlawfully serving as de facto US attorney in California
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.
