17 votes

NAPOLITANO: The Right to Shoot Tyrants, Not Deer

NAPOLITANO: The Right to Shoot Tyrants, Not Deer

By Andrew P. Napolitano Thursday, January 10, 2013

The right of the people to keep and bear arms is an extension of the natural right to self-defense and a hallmark of personal sovereignty. It is specifically insulated from governmental interference by the Constitution and has historically been the linchpin of resistance to tyranny. Yet the progressives in both political parties stand ready to use the coercive power of the government to interfere with the exercise of that right by law-abiding persons because of the gross abuse of that right by some crazies in our midst.

When Thomas Jefferson wrote in the Declaration of Independence that we are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights, he was marrying the nation at its birth to the ancient principles of the natural law that have animated the Judeo-Christian tradition in the West. Those principles have operated as a brake on all governments that recognize them by enunciating the concept of natural rights.

As we have been created in the image and likeness of God the Father, we are perfectly free just as He is. Thus, the natural law teaches that our freedoms are pre-political and come from our humanity and not from the government. As our humanity is ultimately divine in origin, the government, even by majority vote, cannot morally take natural rights away from us. A natural right is an area of individual human behavior — like thought, speech, worship, travel, self-defense, privacy, ownership and use of property, consensual personal intimacy — immune from government interference and for the exercise of which we don’t need the government’s permission.

The essence of humanity is freedom. Government — whether voted in peacefully or thrust upon us by force — is essentially the negation of freedom. Throughout the history of the world, people have achieved freedom when those in power have begrudgingly given it up. From the assassination of Julius Caesar to King John’s forced signing of the Magna Carta, from the English Civil War to the triumph of the allies at the end of World War II, from the fall of communism to the Arab Spring, governments have permitted so-called nobles and everyday folk to exercise more personal freedom as a result of their demands for it and their fighting for it. This constitutes power permitting liberty.

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jan/10/the-right-to...

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Undergrad/Grad School

How the Judge made it through University is very telling.

If he tried it today he would not get very far imo. lol

Not that I went to law school or anything but I pretty much caught the drift :P

donvino

sharkhearted's picture

The JUDGE....for president

He would make a damn good one.

~Chris
Norfolk, VA

Time to INVESTIGATE the investigators of 9/11. PROSECUTE the prosecutors. EXPOSE the cover-up.

much better than Rand

I would support the judge all the way. He has two things Rand does not, a passionate sense of justice and a disarming charisma.

“With laws shall our land be built up, but with lawlessness laid waste.”
-Njal Thorgeirsson

Oh, that fella is just neocon scum

I find it funny that so many will yell the reason for the 2nd to the rooftops but when someone like Yeager speaks about doing something.. Welll

No No.. we can't do that.. It's bad for our movement..

They wouldn't have a fucking movement if someone hadn't done THAT at one time. lol

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=qo8CmO...
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

jrd3820's picture

I find it even funnier

That this Yeager guy was succinct and straight to the point and that upset people. Alex Jones acted like a raving lunatic (which is what I have come to expect from Jones) and that upset people. Both talked about wars so basically both talked about killing people, yet no one likes the way Jones acted and no one likes the way Yeager acted.

How are you supposed to act then?

That is my observation from someone who really does not spend much time watching these guys yell about the 2nd amendment.

They are damned if they yell about it, they are damned if they succinctly state their point.