- Mich. judge to laughing convicted killer: ‘I hope you die in prison’
- Man charged in Kansas City-area highway shootings
- Keystone XL pipeline still on hold after State Dept. decision
- Fla. man charged with killing 16-month-old son to play Xbox undisturbed
- Drones from the deep: Pentagon develops ocean-floor attack robots
- Michigan mayor slaps back atheists’ try to erect ‘reason station’ at city hall
- PHILLIPS: Where is the conservative establishment?
- 7.5-magnitude earthquake shakes southern Mexico
- ISTOOK: IRS “wants to throw us in jail,” says tea party leader
- Easter woes: Chocolate costs soar, becoming ‘unaffordable’ luxury
LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Safeguard against tyranny
Some historians whisper that we are more divided now than we were on the eve of the Civil War, while certain high officers in the executive branch of the federal government are engaged in unabashed assault on our Constitution.
Feeling outnumbered? You're in good company. The Founders felt the same way. Take heart, friends. Our Constitution was written precisely to protect the rights of a minority from the tyranny of the majority. They knew the chaos and failures of Greek models; they wisely selected their best features to form an imperfect (but exemplary) government.
That's why our Founding Fathers constructed not a true democracy, but rather a constitutional republic. Our Constitution's framers were very wise. They recognized that any person seeking to enslave the free citizens of the new republic must first disarm them of effective weaponry. After all, the first skirmish of the Revolution was fought because the British were coming to confiscate weapons and powder in the Lexington magazine.
The Second Amendment was written to safeguard against tyranny — not to assure hunting rights or be against any particular polity. Anyone who favors a "progressive socialist" government should be as vehemently opposed to infringement of their right to bear arms as those who might favor government by military junta.
We're drawn into endless debate over magazine capacity, background checks and loopholes, when the real question is how much will we will give up and what losses we will tolerate. There are, however, a few certainties based on historical precedent: Registration means ultimate confiscation, and nothing surrendered will ever be "enough."
Only with reservations do we consent to be governed by our Constitution, not ruled by imperial edict. If no one else will defend the Constitution, "we the people" must do so. It's ours to defend — or lose.
GEORGE R. GREENE
© Copyright 2014 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.
TWT Video Picks
Get Breaking Alerts
- Harry Reid blasts Bundy ranch supporters as 'domestic terrorists'
- Immigration still on hold: Boehner's office
- Inside China: Marine's comment on islands draws sharp Chinese response
- Supreme Court weighs appeal to concealed-carry gun laws
- PRUDEN: When a bored president just 'mails it in'
- Nancy Pelosi washes immigrants' feet in humble Holy Week act then promotes on Twitter
- Atheists rush to stage Easter display: 'Jesus Christ is a myth'
- BRUCE: Obama deliberately emboldening America's enemies
- Army goes to war with National Guard, seizes Apache attack helicopters
- Critics rail against liberal bias for commencement speakers
Recent Letters to the Editor
- LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Probe Boston teen's medical, custody case
- LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Bundy support a modern-day Tiananmen protest
- LETTER TO THE EDITOR: An honorable president would resign
- LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Bundy support demonstrates voters' distrust
- LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Obamacare disasters were avoidable