On the Road with Sarah

As candidate (personality) Sarah continues her vacation in the East she continues to mangle the Nation's history. Her latest gaff is on the ride of Paul Revere. Her telling is that he was warning the British that they were not going to come and get our guns but we were going to be free. Not exactly, he was riding to warn the colonists that the British were coming not to get your guns but to put down an armed rebellion and they were serious about it. This revisionist thinking that everything was about the right to be armed is non-sense. The revolutionary war is much more complex than that. Some colonists were angry that they weren't represented in the House of Commons, some were angry that the taxes were too high, and still others were angry that they were not making enough money in their businesses. The gun right didn't come until later and because they wrote 3 clauses into the amendment it has been hotly debated ever since. It says as we all know " A well regulated militia as being essential for the protection of the nation. The right to keep and bear arms. Shall not be infringed." The strict constructionists out there (Sarah) focus on the right to keep and bear arms. They don't talk much about the well regulated militia very much or the infringement. We have passed some type of concealed carry in nearly every State. But, nearly all of those require some type of license and or training. That is an infringement. Not talked about much by the NRA or the right wing. No one is out there saying that you need to be a member of a well regulated militia. Well regulated implies Government run and we know that Government is the problem. If not Government who has the power to regulate? The founders were not anarchists. They were businessmen, scholars (elitists), and farmers who recognized that Government played a role in regulating (leveling the playing field) and governing in order to maintain a civil society. This would be at odds with our current leadership which ignores the general welfare clause of the Constitution in favor of removing the safety net so that desperate people are on the streets. That scenario has not worked out well in history.