Natural Right to Self-Defense on ‘Cruz Control’ Back to Basics

ted cruz on second amendment

LITCHFIELD, N.H.—Appealing to New Hampshire’s powerful gun culture, Sen. Ted Cruz said Sunday that he’s “pressing” Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John McCain to hold hearings on whether soldiers should be allowed to carry their own concealed firearms onto military bases.

“I am very concerned about that policy,” the Texas senator told 120 gun owners at a hunting club here, before taking a trip to a firing range for some target practice. “I think it’s very important to have a public discussion about why we’re denying our soldiers the ability to exercise their Second Amendment rights.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/04/ted-cruz-2016-second-amendment-gun-rights-117133.html#ixzz3XtYtZ5RX

The right to life vis a vis the right to self-defense does not and must not end upon a citizen’s admission into military ranks and these same  rights do divorce themselves from civilians who work on or visit military bases.

Senator Ted Cruz works to restore Second Amendment rights to our military personnel, as they were before leftists expanded control over American society.

Want to know more?

Can we just get down to brass tacks on the subject of the Bill of Rights, in particular the Second Amendment?

Amendment II

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

What do these words mean?

The Second Amendment has two succinct phrases.

The first, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State” acknowledges the necessity of a standing military force for the purpose of protecting the respective states. Subsequently, there are National Guard soldiers and airmen in all fifty states and four U.S. territories of Guam, Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands and the District of Columbia.

The second phrase also acknowledges the vital importance of the right of the people to keep and bear arms. Period. It’s a right, not a privilege. Regarding the first phrase, let’s consider the obvious: residents of a particular state or territory are the pool of people from which those in the first come. Is this second phrase a stand-alone principle, or something else?

The second phrase serves as a restraint, a check, on the first. And, it’s more. Consider the following words of our Unanimous Declaration of Independence.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

The framers of our Texas Constitution understood the potential for tyrannical government. Note the wording of the Texas bill of right, Article 1, Section 23.

RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS. Every citizen shall have the right to keep and bear arms in the lawful defense of himself or the State; but the Legislature shall have power, by law, to regulate the wearing of arms, with a view to prevent crime.

We have the natural, God-given right to life which inextricably links self-defense with defense of our neighbors, those in close proximity.

Logic, reason and history affirm a principle of the right to life in the article linked above where Senator Ted Cruz takes he fight for Second Amendment rights to military bases.

Perhaps you don’t know. Rapid erosion of Second Amendment rights for military personnel began two months following Clinton’s inauguration into the office of presidency with issuance of Army Regulation 190-14, an extension of DoD 5210.56 issued April 1, 2011.

Reference: TITLE 18—CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, CHAPTER 44—FIREARMS, Section 930: “whoever knowingly possesses or causes to be present a firearm or other dangerous weapon in a Federal facility (other than a Federal court facility), or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 1 year, or both.”

How well has the aforementioned federal firearms restrictions worked for vulnerable military and civilian personnel working on military bases?

  • 2009: Muslim Army officer Nidal Hassan massacred in cold blood 13 persons on Fort Hood [Read More]
  • 2012: Spc. Marshall D. Drake shot and killed Pfc. Grant Wise
  • 2012: Spc. Ricky Elder shot and killed Lt. Col. Roy L. Tisdale at Fort Bragg, N.C, then committed suicide with the same weapon [Read More]
  • 2013: Civilian Alvin Roundtree shot and wounded his common law wife, an Air Force Captain [Read More]
  • 2013: Fort Knox soldier Marquinta E. Jacobs shot and killed Lloyd Gibert, a civilian employer at a Fort Knox, Ky. [Read More]
  • 2013: Marine Sgt. Eusebrio Lopez shot and killed Lance Corporal Sara Castromata and Corporal Jacob Wooley before committing suicide with his weapon [Read More]

Learn more from NBC-4 Washington: A History of Shootings at Military Installations in the U.S.

Call it “workplace violence”. Call it “mass shootings by rogue military personnel”. Call it whatever you wish. Families of the bereaved call it heartbreak.

John White

 

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s