ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel

The 2nd Amendment Explained Once and for All

Updated on November 11, 2017
jackclee lm profile image

Jack is currently a volunteer at the Westchester County Archives. Jack has worked at IBM for over 28 years.


Recently, in some dialog with other hubbers here, I have come to realize that many people have a miss understanding of the 2nd Amendment and the reason it was adopted by the Founders of our nation. I decided to clear this once and for all.

- Jul. 2016


Why did I decide to write this hub? In recent conversation with some Hubers, I was surprised by the lack of basic understanding of the 2nd Amendment.

Here are a few quotes - I left the name out on purpose...

This was in response to my assertion that the 2nd Amendment was in place to void off tyrants...

Jackclee: I disagree. Yes, one reason was to defend agaist foreign invaders. However, the Founders clearly was thinking about citizens defending themselves from domestic threats either personal or an over reaching tyranical government.

Hubber Reply: "Are you kidding, Jack? Domestic threats? Tyrants? It's only one sentence and clearly states: "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state" That's straight forward English language!!!"

Jackclee: I am not kidding. I am a student of history and the Constitution, unlike most citizens. I read the letters of the Founding fathers and their arguments before signing the Constitution. They were afraid of another government that will use their power..

A Founder's Quote

"Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence … from the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable … the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference — they deserve a place of honor with all that's good."
George Washington
First President of the United States

The Right to Bear Arms

There are three main reason for the 2nd Amendment back in 1789 of our founding. The same reason exists today. Some have proposed the repeal of the 2nd Amendment because they claim we are a different nation today and we have progressed past the need for it. I emphatically disagree. The 2nd Amendment is the insurance policy that we hold to keep our liberty.

Here are the 3 main reasons:

1. To protect and defend the homeland from foreign invasions.

2. To protect our family from intruders.

3. To protect our nation from a tyrannical government over reaching their power under the Constitution.

Detail Explanation

1. You can make a case against number 1 by stating that our country's military might is so great that there is no longer a need for individuals to defend the homeland. Wars are fought with missiles and bombs and tanks and airplanes. An individual with a gun is no match And not needed. That is true to an extent. If the war was fought over seas, we have a standing army. If the war is brought to the homeland, we have the National Guards. However, what if the invader was more deviant. If an EMP attack were to take place, no army would be able to defend us. An EMP is an electro magnetic pulse that will take down all electronic components And our energy grid.

2. You can make an argument on number 2 by stating that we have a police force and 911 that will respond to any home invasion. This may be true if you live in a big city like NYC or LA, but if you live in the suburbs or in rural America, the police is far from home and may not respond in time. A gun will stop an intruder.

3. The last point is still relevant today as it was in 1789. History have shown us that a tyrant even a benevolent one can take over a nation if the citizens are disarmed. Let me remind you how Hitler came to power in post World War I Germany. He was very charismatic and he was able to capture the imagination of the majority of the German people. One of the first act Hitler did was to outlaw gun ownership. Once he had his brown shirts in place, the populace have no recourse but to follow him even if they disagree with his Third Reich ambitions.

It is not hard to image even in America 2016 that some person can come to power under a crisis either natural disaster or man made, and declare marshall law, suspend elections and take control. The only thing that will stand against tyranny is the guns in hundreds of million of private homes. It is for this reason that no sane person will even attempt to over throw our Constitutional Republic. Can you imaging the optics of armed soldiers going door to door to take down the people? It just won't happen.

EMP Attack


I hope this hub will educate all on the need for the 2nd Amendment. We can debate the need for gun control legislation and define what is a legal gun or weapon and to require background checks... All this is perfectly fine and needed conversation. We all want a safe community where gun ownership is a serious business and the people who own them are responsible and knows how to handle guns safely.

It is never about the right to hunt. Some have use the argument that no one should have more than 7 bullets in a chamber at a time. That is a false narative. Hunting is one of our survival skills. In the distant past, we did use guns to hunt for food. If we were ever to be attacked by an EMP, we may need to resort to hunting again for survival. At least for a period of time until the power grid could be restored.

A last reminder. It was during the LA riots of the 1980s when Charlton Heston told the story. Some of his liberal friends in Hollywood came to his door asking if they could borrow a gun. They had been all anti gun activists. When the chips were down, guess what they did? They want a gun for protection. It is just common sense.

Charlton Heston - former President of the NRA

© 2016 Jack Lee


    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • jackclee lm profile image

      Jack Lee 17 months ago from Yorktown NY

      Yes, but the debate is only because some people don't understand it and why it is necessary.

    • Carolyn M Fields profile image

      Carolyn Fields 17 months ago from South Dakota, USA

      The right of the people to bear arms was about personal protection, AND about protection from tyranny by the government. Also - take note of the comma in the sentence just before "the right of the people." But because of the word "militia" - we will be debating this for a long time.