08-06-2018, 02:09 PM
grayfox Wrote:Right On!!!
The one difference I gather from other earlier discussions is his reference to the term "free state" -- he puts this as referring to the country as a whole, so that being a free state means free from tyranny, and thus to that end the people (the same "people" who can petition their government, ie, "the people" refers NOT to the government itself but the people) keep and bear arms.
I would guess, as a caveat, that this expresses a right that USA citizens have. Other countries may or may not recognize this right for their citizens... It would be a much larger discussion to have, as to whether all people everywhere ought to have such a right or not. Since nations by definition have sovereignty over their internal affairs, I'll personally stick to the point of whether here in the USA, citizens have such a right.
But I see another aspect of this as well, and that is, under our system the proper role of the "government" is to safeguard this right, not to grant it. I see a big difference in those two roles.
Exactly, well stated!

