From Kaili Joy Gray at DailyKos (of all places!)
Liberals can quote legal precedent, news reports, and exhaustive studies. They can talk about the intentions of the Founders. They can argue at length against the tyranny of the government. And they will, almost without exception, conclude the necessity of respecting, and not restricting, civil liberties.
Except for one: the right to keep and bear arms.
When it comes to discussing the Second Amendment, liberals check rational thought at the door.
Gray then presents several cogent reasons why liberals should support and defend gun rights along with all other rights. The following caught my attention, because I’d never heard it explained this way.
No. 5: The Second Amendment is about revolution.
In no other country, at no other time, has such a right existed. It is not the right to hunt. It is not the right to shoot at soda cans in an empty field. It is not even the right to shoot at a home invader in the middle of the night.
It is the right of revolution.
Let me say that again: It is the right of revolution.
“Whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government.”
Why is it that guns make liberals so crazy?
Constitutional scholar Akhil Amar argues that the Second Amendment is also the foundation for rights as seemingly unrelated as equal treatment for women in the military, as well as others. You can hear his interview on Radio West here:
http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/kuer/news.newsmain?action=article&ARTICLE_ID=1669172
“Whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government.â€
Oops, that’s from the Declaration of Independence, which isn’t remotely a legal document. You don’t have the right to a revolution. In fact, seeking to undermine/overthrow the government is explicitly forbidden by the Constitution, it’s punishable by death. It’s called “treason.”
OTOH, Thomas Jefferson thought we should have a revolution every 20 years or so
Treason, like history, is defined by the winner. The Founding Fathers committed Treason in the eyes of the British, do you contend that they were wrong in doing so? Treason is a gamble, one that you had better win, because the price of failure is usually death.
Rights are not granted by the constitution, this is the universal error made by liberals. Rights derive from Natural law, the Constitution merely recognizes pre-existing rights, as does the Declaration of Independence.
In the Texas v. White (1869) decision, SCOTUS wrote of Texas’s secession, “There was no place for reconsideration or revocation [of the decision to join the union], except through revolution or through consent of the States.”
Revolution is confirmed to be our right– so long as it doesn’t fail.
“if you win, you’re a founding father, if you lose, you’re a traitor” — Saul Alinsky
Your last statement presumes that Liberals aren’t already crazy. I am of the opinion that they are.