Updated: Aug 21, 2019
What would the Founders say in regards to the division between the two major political parties today? We may be surprised that many would celebrate as it relates to partisan bickering and division. The foundation of our great Republic was fashioned with one part discourse and two parts bickering. How else would the thirteen colonies become a United States? The original idea of forming a country was first forged in the flames of division, later birthed in the womb of Lady Liberty, afterwards, draped as a swaddling newborn with the blanket of Freedom, fashioned from God‘s Spinning Wheel; the Bill of Rights.
Some of today's political pundits would have you believe the Founders were for peaceful resolution concerning political parties. Remember they were ready to die for treason for simply signing a document. Put yourself in their place and tell yourself you would do the same and not debate your argument to your last breath. Generations have come and gone, we have fought wars, here and abroad; for what says our Founders? So we can sing Kumbaya?
God forbid, they would scream HEAR! HEAR!
The Founders were a plethora of common and not so common folk: farmers, lawyers, physicians and laypersons. Yearning for an idea so unique they were willing to put themselves and their families at risk. Did the Founders try and seek a peaceful agreement with the King? Of course, but when all options failed they had no other choice. A few scragglier wanted to return and beg for mercy. George Washington was prepared for either course. When ordered to fight... Fight they did. They were truly in it to win it, at all cost. Even if it meant their very lives and the end of an experiment.
Whether true or anecdotal the statement concerning what Benjamin Franklin said after a question from a concerned citizen while he exited the Constitutional Convention of 1787, his answer still resonates:
As quoted in several article and accounts. Below is one of many and the account to be most accurate to this writer:
"The University of Chicago Magazine in 1940:
When the delegates were going out onto the cobble streets of Philadelphia, prepared to celebrate on “capon and wine,” as the record reads, Ben Franklin walked ahead. A window opened and a lady put her head out and said, “Dr. Franklin, what is it—a monarchy or a republic?” He stopped and said, “A republic, Madam, if you can keep it.”
"If you can keep it" should echo in every Americans thoughts. It is clearly something the Founders were concerned about and the surety of maintaining the republic would squarely be left in the hands of the citizens, then and now.
FOUNDERS AND THE RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS
Let's start with this premise: The Founders did not fashion the 2nd Amendment to protect hunters and sporting enthusiast. Now that this part is clear, let's follow the logic to its full conclusion. If this premise is true then what follows is also true: The weapons of their day were black powder and single shot. They were wise-men but the Founders did not possess a crystal ball to see 400 years into the future. Being wise, they structured the 2nd Amendment to address two issues: The Right of a free people and the responsibility of the State to the people.
Notice how the sentence is structured: “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.” First let's define what a comma does ( Commas and periods are the most frequently used punctuation marks. Commas customarily indicate a brief pause; they're not as final as periods. Rule 1. Use commas to separate words and word groups in a simple series of three or more items.) In essence a comma separates words and phrases. Second, what's a Militia? (A military force raised from the civil population to supplement a regular army in an emergency.) Notice that a Militia is created from the civil population. In other words, the people. So the question is why would the Founders call civilians a Militia in the first phrase and later reuse the term as "the people" in the latter? To confuse the two as the same meaning is illogical.
Logic requires you understand the Founders state of mind. They were all familiar with firearms, and their use for hunting and sport. They were also aware of the dangers which may lie ahead if the government resorted to tyranny and force as a means to govern the citizens.
The last phrase of the 2nd Amendment is as clear as a crystal ball; the People have a right to arm themselves by any means necessary to protect their God given Rights and the State shall not infringe upon this Right. Who else would the Founders be referring? Wild Life Fish and Game? God Forbid not!