I am really getting tired of hearing the diversionary response of spineless politicians when asked if they support the Second Amendment of our Constitution.  Quite often they will say, and I quote, “I am in favor of protecting the rights of hunters and sportsmen”.  This is a politicially-correct, pansified response.  You won’t hear this from the enviro-extremists or unashamedly fascist politicians who are against any guns, meat-eating, and people altogether.  You will hear this response from the moderates and anyone who doesn’t want to get a lot of grief mail or is seeking re-election because it upsets the smallest number of people, and unfortunately this actually placates many who are concerned.  What’s even worse is that it completely diverts attention from the purpose and intent of the Second Amendment.

I have an announcement to make:  “The purpose of Second Amendment of the Constitution is not focused on hunters and sportsmen, it’s focused on defense.”

The second amendment covers two lines of defense as derived contextually throughout the Amendment itself and the entire Bill of Rights.  The first line of defense is national defense.  After all, it is pretty fearsome for an enemy to attack a nation who not only has a well-armed defense force, but a well-armed citizenry.  The second line of defense is self-defense.  When national defense is not the issue, there is still a need for personal protection against predators, criminals, and yes “contextually speaking to the Bill of Rights” tyrants.  The Second Amendment protects all the rest.  It keeps a free people free. It does not talk about hunters and sportsmen, it talks about defense, and it’s about time that the politicians who swore to uphold and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic live up to their oath and get behind the idea of preserving the right of personal defense of private citizens.  Hunters and sportsmen have been around since the creation of humans, and simply benefit from the advancement of weapon technology.

When asked about their support of the Second Amendment, their answer should be “I fully support the right of our nation to defend itself.  I also fully support the right of individual citizens to keep and bear arms to defend themselves.”  if they don’t answer this way, they are in violation of their oath, they are bordering on treason, and they should be removed from office for not protecting or even working to violate our rights as citizens.

Radical and Right

Red State Radical