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.’”
Pentagon stopping gender transition treatment for transgender troops
Trump targets massive investments in first Middle East trip
Trump endorses Jack Ciattarelli for New Jersey governor: ‘A winner’
Trump backs Jack Ciattarelli in coveted New Jersey governor race
Fatal fall in Washington’s North Cascades kills 3, leaves 1 survivor
Florida State University alleged mass shooter appears in mugshot with disfigured face after hospital release
Far-left mayor arrested at ICE facility denies impeding law enforcement, says protest ‘absolutely’ effective
Tycoon Couple Arrested After Massive Federal Raid, Accused of Working with Cartels
Pro-Israel Americans urge Trump to ‘tread lightly’ with Qatar
Trump officials celebrate white South Africans’ arrival in DC
Major Underwater Volcano Off US Coast Is Showing Signs of Impending Eruption, Scientists Say
Fetterman Showing ‘Warning Signs,’ Dems Might Step In: Explosive Reports
Newsom calls on California cities to ban homeless encampments
Organizers Cancel Former ‘The Voice’ Contestant’s Concerts Because She Attended a Pro-Life Event
Harvard president claims ‘unfounded retaliation’ amid Trump funding feud
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.
Pentagon stopping gender transition treatment for transgender troops
Trump targets massive investments in first Middle East trip
Trump endorses Jack Ciattarelli for New Jersey governor: ‘A winner’
Trump backs Jack Ciattarelli in coveted New Jersey governor race
Fatal fall in Washington’s North Cascades kills 3, leaves 1 survivor
Florida State University alleged mass shooter appears in mugshot with disfigured face after hospital release
Far-left mayor arrested at ICE facility denies impeding law enforcement, says protest ‘absolutely’ effective
Tycoon Couple Arrested After Massive Federal Raid, Accused of Working with Cartels
Pro-Israel Americans urge Trump to ‘tread lightly’ with Qatar
Trump officials celebrate white South Africans’ arrival in DC
Major Underwater Volcano Off US Coast Is Showing Signs of Impending Eruption, Scientists Say
Fetterman Showing ‘Warning Signs,’ Dems Might Step In: Explosive Reports
Newsom calls on California cities to ban homeless encampments
Organizers Cancel Former ‘The Voice’ Contestant’s Concerts Because She Attended a Pro-Life Event
Harvard president claims ‘unfounded retaliation’ amid Trump funding feud
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.
