Poised to overturn the Second Amendment

The Colorado legislature prepares to cross a bridge too far. Photo: "Stand your ground" by Don Troiani

COLORADO SPRINGS, CO, February 17, 2013 — On Monday, the Colorado House will convene to consider, and will likely pass, four gun control laws that will strip Colorado citizens of their right to bear arms, guaranteed up until now by both the U.S. and Colorado Constitutions.

The four laws are:

House Bill 1224 – Bans magazines with a capacity greater than fifteen rounds.

House Bill 1226 – Repeals current law allowing individuals with a concealed carry permit to carry a firearm for self-defense on a college or university campus.

House Bill 1228 – Imposes a “gun tax” for a background check when purchasing a firearm.

House Bill 1229 – Criminalizes the private transfer of a firearm.

READ MORE: Gun battle in the Colorado Legislature

HB 1229 is especially egregious. It forbids a citizen to transfer a firearm without the consent of the state, and there must be a criminal background investigation before the transfer can take place. The FBI and CBI background checks that are already routinely done are not enough. The nature of this background check has been glossed over in media reporting.

As if that is not enough, more laws are coming from the senate side of the legislature.

Committee hearings were held last week and despite capacity crowds, the bills were advanced on party line votes without amendment. Opponents were not allowed to testify. One man, wearing an Oathkeepers T-shirt with the Oath of Office written on the back was ejected for wearing incendiary clothing. A county sheriff who testified against the bills said that in thirty years of his law enforcement career he had never been treated so rudely.

Hearings were rescheduled at the last minute to confound critics. The legislature has become a circus of “show trials” where the sponsors of bills orchestrate testimony in favor and minimize or outright deny testimony against. It is the tyranny of the majority that the Founders feared and sought to guard against.

Will the people of Colorado stand for the Second Amendment being trampled?

We do not give up our right to self-defense when we give government the right to protect us. The common saying is that when seconds count, the police are only minutes away. But that saying misses the bigger picture: While we rely on government to protect us from criminals, government itself can be a danger to us. History proves that governments have killed more of their own people than wars, invasions and criminals.

Even the United States is not exempt; consider the internment of Japanese-American citizens during World War Two, which liberal progressives love to point out, was a relatively mild form of the concentration camp. What progressives fail to mention is that it was the progressive Democratic administration of Franklin Roosevelt that did it.

Without arms, the citizen is helpless before the coercive power of government. That is why, when the authorities sent the regulars to seize the militia’s weapons at Lexington and Concord, it marked a line crossed ‒ a bridge, actually ‒ from which there was no return.

Now the current administrations in Denver and Washington seek to strip citizens of the right to bear arms. There is no polite way to put it: It is a brazen power play to overcome the Second Amendment under the guise of protecting us. Protecting us from whom? From the crazies among us? Who defines “crazy”?

It we allow this to happen, who will protect us from the government?

That is the real import of the Second Amendment. As Jefferson said, “The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.”

When legislators ignore the bedrock law of the Constitution in order to make criminals of citizens, it is not the citizens who are criminals. When legislators ignore the law, they are the criminals. They do not get to define what the law is; they must work within the framework of the law. In this country, rulers govern by the consent of the governed. Anything more is the very definition of tyranny.

What is the people’s response to be?

The Declaration of Independence tells us all we need to know about dealing with unjust and tyrannical government:

“it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”


READ MORE from Al Maurer at Red Pill, Blue Pill

At The Voice of Liberty, we seek to advance the principles of liberty, because tyranny never sleeps.

The Voice of Liberty

This article is the copyrighted property of the writer and Communities @ WashingtonTimes.com. Written permission must be obtained before reprint in online or print media. REPRINTING TWTC CONTENT WITHOUT PERMISSION AND/OR PAYMENT IS THEFT AND PUNISHABLE BY LAW.

More from Red Pill, Blue Pill
blog comments powered by Disqus
Al Maurer

Al Maurer is a political scientist and founder of The Voice of Liberty. He writes on topics of limited government and individual rights.

Contact Al Maurer


Please enable pop-ups to use this feature, don't worry you can always turn them off later.

Question of the Day
Photo Galleries
Popular Threads
Powered by Disqus