Thursday, September 14, 2006

Yale, you say? Well, can you imagine that!

New Englander and Yale review
Vol. 21, Issue 81, October 1862
State Rights
"...Take, for instance, the right to keep and bear arms. The second amendment says, “it shall not be infringed.” May it still be infringed by everybody except Congress, and Congress not bound to protect it? “Nor shall any person be compelled. . . . . . to be a witness against himself?” Is the whole duty of the Government, in regard to this part of the Constitution, which they were appointed to execute, merely to abstain from violating it themselves, though they should allow it to be violated every day, by subjects owing allegiance to the same Constitution?
"The second and sixth amendments seem almost necessarily to be applied to the states by their terms. If a well regulated militia is necessary to a free state, it is certainly as necessary that the right to bear arms should not be infringed by the state itself, as by any body else...."
New Englander and Yale Review
Vol. 25, Issue 94, Jan. 1866
Government in the United States
"...It is a limitation of the powers of the national government to the uses for which they were granted and a prohibition of their being perverted to the infraction of the just rights of the States or of the civil liberty of the people. It is one of a large number of amendments which were passed to meet the attacks made on the Constitution, and quiet the fears created by these attacks, that the government of the United States would absorb all power, and becoming a consolidated despotism would overthrow the State organizations, and subvert the liberties of the people. These amendments were intended to furnish a rule of construction, being specific declarations that power should not be assumed nor enlarged by any construction to take away the rights of the States or the rights of the people. The tenth article is of the same general import as the other amendments, which declare the right of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the government for a redress of grievances, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, the enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not he construed to deny, or disparage others retained by the people. These are all manifestly limitations of power in favor of civil liberty, not reservations of sovereignty. The government of the United States is one of limitations, prohibitions, and duties imposed, for the observance of which the Constitution has provided every possible security. But any doctrine suggesting remedies outside of its provisions is dangerous and revolutionary...."
Hmmmm, wonder what happened? The above opinions seem to be in total contradiction to what we are witnessing today, don't they? Or, is it just me?


Anonymous said...

The steadily-growing briars of tyranny have slowly blocked the path of liberty and individual sovereignty in the United States.

While I believe that foul weed sprouted in Washington, D.C. before, and then flourished after, the War Between the States, it has certainly come to flower under a Federal that has found treason more convenient than restraint.

Were I optimistic, I would pray for revolution under the philosophy of liberty and God-given rights that animated our Founding Fathers.

As a realist, I seek, but do not find, men and women who carry the flame of liberty in their hearts and souls.

As a pessimist, I note the universal ignorance of our youth and weep for the future.

The only reason that Yale can express such lucid and honest ideas is the probability that, even if the truth is now acknowledged, our Constitution has become moribund and meaningless.

The truth no longer matters.

E. David Quammen said...

phatshantz -

I hear and understand you man. It truly is a frustrating situation. However, I believe there is yet hope. Have seen indications that people seem to be waking up. And God always reserves to himself those that won't bow the knee to the enemy.

True, we may be the minority. But, it was the same in the time of the founders. Roughly 7% of the pop. at the time, (250,000+), stood up to fight off the tyranny of the crown. Many of the colonists were satisfied living under the tyranny imposed.

Once a people get a true taste of freedom, it grows and spreads. We have the opportunity presently, with the help of God and the internet, to spread the message.

The shame would be, is if the many that can, don't rattle the cages and sound the alarm. I've seen your posts before, so I know that you care and are doing something. We need to inspire others, as much as possible, to start doing the same.

If these pricks, that want to take our freedom, want a fight - let's give them one! Let's pound the message home, so hard, that it will NEVER be forgotten!

Draven said...


Gun control laws are the last 'Jim Crow' laws on the books. Tat is the exact difference btween the two interpretations- the whole 'collective rights' theory started with the end of the Civil War.