Biden Wants ALL Your Guns! Here's The Proof

Also, what the Founders actually meant by "Arms".

From the very beginning, you couldn’t own any weapon you wanted to own. From the very beginning that the Second Amendment existed, certain people weren’t allowed to have weapons. - Joe Biden demonstrating his ignorance and distain for the 2nd Amendment

Free men do not ask permission to bear arms - Thomas Jefferson

Biden doesn't know the difference between his wife and his sister, yet he is signing Executive Orders on what is and is not an “assault weapon?”

The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution:

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.

Infringe:

As per Merriman Webster:

to encroach upon in a way that violates law or the rights of another

Arms:

As per Merriman Webster:

noun: a means (such as a weapon) of offense or defense

verb: to furnish or equip with weapons

There is this convoluted, woke, left wing, Marxist, (fill in your own adjective), idea of what the Founders meant by “arms”.

What were Thomas Jefferson's thoughts on things?

Quoting Thomas Jefferson on interpreting the Constitution:

On every question of construction (of the Constitution) let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit of the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed.

Translation: We know what we meant when we wrote the Constitution. Don't even try to put words in our mouths!

Quoting Thomas Jefferson on the Constitution:

The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases. The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first.

Thomas Jefferson taking a quote from Cesare Beccaria's Essay on Crimes and Punishments, originally published in Italian in 1764:

Laws that forbid the carrying of arms . . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes . . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.

Exactly what we see in increasing frequency all over America!

From Tenth Amendment Center:

The meaning of the word “arms” has changed little since it was first used seven hundred years ago. Its definition has never restricted civilian use of military weapons, including when the Second Amendment was approved.

“Arms” comes from Middle English and originated from the Old French word “armes,” which meant “weapons of a warrior.” This word dates back to 1300. “Arms” also originates from the Latin word for “weapons,”arma.” This word was also first used in the 14^th Century.

It’s clear the meaning allowed for a very broad definition of what constituted “arms.” The Bill of Rights of 1689 states that the “subjects which are Protestants may have arms for their defence suitable to their conditions and as allowed by law.”

The last part of the sentence is very telling. It’s a conditional phrase meant to limit the type of “arms’ allowed by Protestant subjects. The limitation imposed meant that the word “arms”, had a definition permitting a very wide range of weapons including those the document’s authors decided could be restricted by law.

From this we can conclude that the word “arms” referred to weapons found among contemporary military arsenals.

Since the word “arms” means the same thing today as it did centuries ago it’s only logical the authors of the Second Amendment meant the same thing. And unlike the English Bill of Rights, there are no limitations placed on the right to keep and bear arms in the U.S. Constitution.

Not that it would matter, since it is a natural right not a privilege granted to us by the government. But it removes this one final argument a gun control advocate might make to justify restrictions.

Alexander Hamilton on the Second Amendment:

Alexander Hamilton's essay in Federalist 29 emphasizing the counter balancing effect of a equally armed citizen militia against a standing army:

. . . if circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little, if at all, inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow-citizens.

Noah Webster on the Second Amendment:

Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom of Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States.

George Mason on the necessity of armed citizens:

No man has a greater regard for the military gentlemen than I have. I admire their intrepidity, perseverance, and valor. But when once a standing army is established in any country, the people lose their liberty. When, against a regular and disciplined army, yeomanry are the only defence,–yeomanry, unskilful and unarmed,–what chance is there for preserving freedom?

Yeomanry - Carry-over from England. Free men who own their own land.

Which is why Mason referred to “militia” as the ‘whole of the people, except for a few public officials.”

Those who believe that only the permanent military should have exclusive access to certain types of firearms need to explain how such an arrangement will prevent tyranny from a standing army in contradiction to both common sense and the warnings of founders like Mason, Webster, Hamilton, Jefferson and others.

Someone tell Joe from the very beginning yes indeed you could own any weapon you wanted to! There is a gross unconstitutional misconception that Americans can only own “arms” “permitted by the government”!

The Founders feared a standing army:

• The Founders had suffered under British troops actually moving into your home and eating your food!

  • The reason for Amendment III in the Bill of Rights:

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

• The British deciding to seize arms was the fuse that lit the Revolution at Concord and Lexington.

• The reason that Article I Section 8 of the Constitution only allows Congress:

  • “To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;”

  • With no such limitation on the Navy.

Courtesy Epoch Times:

President Joe Biden signed an executive order on March 14 to advance gun-control measures, including a step toward universal background checks, as much as current law will allow without requiring new legislation.

The Act would increase the number of required background checks by redefining the term “who is engaged in the business of dealing firearms.” Currently, the law considers someone engaged in the business of dealing firearms if it is their “principal objective of livelihood and profit.” The Act would change that to “predominately earn a profit.”

Translation: Any selling or buying of guns even between private individuals would require a background check nationwide!

The executive order will also instruct federal officials to promote so-called “Red Flag Laws.” These laws have so far been adopted in 19 states and the District of Columbia. They allow for the confiscation of firearms from individuals determined to be dangerous by the courts.

“Red Flag Laws” violate:

• The 4th Amendment for lack of probably cause.

• The 5th Amendment because you are deprived of your property without due process.

• The 6th Amendment because you had no trial, were not presented with the charges and evidence against you, no opportunity to confront your accuser(s), or assistance of counsel.

• The 7th Amendment because you are guaranteed a jury trial in controversies exceeding $20 and your gun or guns seized are worth hundreds, maybe thousands of dollars.

Also from Epoch Times:

Gun Owners of America, who I mentioned in a previous essay found in Biden’s $6.8 trillion budget proposal for 2024 there is a drastic increase included for the ATF.

Biden’s budget proposal contains $1.9 billion for the ATF. this is a 13.6 percent increase over 2022 and half a billion dollars more than the agency’s fiscal 2020 budget.

If passed as written, Biden’s budget would expand the ATF by 35.7 percent—an overall growth of more than 50 percent since the Obama administration.

I don't know about you, but that sure gives me warm fuzzies!

In conclusion:

The Founders were clear in their meanings in the Second Amendment. There is no limit on the type or style of arms! “Shall not be infringed” means exactly that!

It’s obvious to the intellectually honest that in using the word “arms” the Second Amendment’s writers acknowledged the right of ordinary citizens to keep and bear the same weapons used by soldiers in the military. Our rights are not and should not be be based on the technology at the time those rights were acknowledged.

All so called “gun laws” are a violation of the Constitution!

Remember, it's not the mentally deranged or evil people who are the murderers. It's THE GUN!

Does the government fear us? Or do we fear the government? When the people fear the government, tyranny has found victory. The federal government is our servant, not our master! - Thomas Jefferson