Clear Intent Of The Second Amendment: Citizens To Be Armed

Part 3 in Series

There are a lot of voices lately giving us all kinds of opinions on the Second Amendment. When posed with such a controversial and provocative subject, I prefer to go to original sources when formulating my own opinion and determining from those sources on how best to defend it.
Our founding fathers, having just struggled for independence from England, were rightfully cautious that the new federal government they were forming might one day become as tyrannical as the one they just defeated. They knew that if it had the authority to control citizens’ access to firearms, then an oppressive government could ultimately disarm the people, just as England had attempted to do to them. This would leave the citizenry powerless to both restore their liberties and force their government to adhere to the new Constitution.
In their own words, quite clearly and concisely, this then is how they defined the purpose of the Second Amendment:
• James Madison, considered the father of the Constitution, said in 1789, that “A well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country.” And, “[The Constitution preserves] the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation (where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.” How absolutely prescient. He also said “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country.”
• Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist 28 that “If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no resource left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers, may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual state. In a single state, if the persons intrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair.”
“The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms.” So said Samuel Adams, Massachusetts Ratifying Convention, 1788. How much clearer could that be stated?
• George Mason, co-author of the Second Amendment, questioned “I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them.”
• And certainly the most distinguished and trusted founding father of them all, George Washington said “Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people’s liberty teeth and keystone under independence … from the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurrences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable … the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference — they deserve a place of honor with all that’s good.”
Those sources are good enough for me and leave me with a pretty thorough understanding of the intent behind the Second Amendment. And do please take note, I could not find one reference to “hunting” in regards to the Second Amendment in any originating sources.
Next issue: why I want all responsible citizens to be well armed. You can reach me at ctyreeccbd@gmail.com