WND Exclusive – Bill of Rights: 9 Apply to the Individual but 1 Does Not?

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

It recently dawned on me what should be the most obvious argument for the individual right to “keep and bear arms.”

The primary purpose of the 10 Amendments that form the Bill of Rights is to protect the natural rights of the individual from an encroaching federal government function. The only way someone would not know this is if they have not read them.

In fact, each of the Bill of Right’s 10 Amendments – there were originally 17 – states this by use of the words person, people, owner, or accused. The only two that do not expressly state the individual are the Seventh and Eighth. They do, however, use inference to make the point that both pertain to the individual.

So when a leftist begins to spout off about the Second Amendment, that it applies only to militias, we must remind him of this. If necessary, review each of the 10, and it will become clear that the founders did not intend for nine of the 10 to pertain primarily to the individual and yet single out just the Second as not having any individual-protection component. It defies logic. But then so does liberalism.

Rather than take my word for it – let’s do just that. Let’s quickly review all 10 of the Amendments to see that they are in fact meant to protect the individual.

The First is obvious. Most people are familiar with it, and it is quoted by the left quite often. It’s clearly an individual right. Again – we are looking for the key words: people, person, owner, accused or an inference. All these terms equal the individual.

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Inference and “people.”

Number 2 I will skip for now and deal with it at the end.

Continue reading

About the Common Constitutionalist

Brent, aka The Common Constitutionalist, is a Constitutional Conservative, and advocates for first principles, founders original intent and enemy of progressives. He is former Navy, Martial Arts expert. As well as publisher of the Common Constitutionalist blog, he also is a contributing writer for Political Outcast, Godfather Politics, Minute Men News (Liberty Alliance), Freedom Outpost, the Daily Caller, Vision To America and Free Republic. He also writes an exclusive weekly column for World Net Daily (WND).

3 comments on “WND Exclusive – Bill of Rights: 9 Apply to the Individual but 1 Does Not?

  1. Pingback: WND Exclusive – Bill of Rights: 9 Apply to the Individual but 1 Does Not? – USSA News | The Tea Party's Front Page

  2. When I got to the first reference to Bayesian inference, where he calls Bayes rule a “conjecture, I scrolled up to see if this piece had been published on April 1st. However Bayesian inference has no evolution mechanism of how knowledge changes given an initial prior. I would say that this is precisely the only thing that Bayesian inference provides: a mechanism to update your knowledge when you obtain new information. But it”s true that Bayesian inference will not tell you by itself what is the right “likelihood or what is the right “prior (or what is the “data, for that matter). It”s not clear to me what”s his opinion on MacKay”s “Information Theory, Inference, and Learning Algorithms, which he says should be required reading for every Deep Learning practitioner. The “Inference in the title is Bayesian inference, though. Maybe he considers him one of those Bayesian cargo cultists, I”m not sure. While I don”t fully understand what is he arguing against, I have to say that as an avid reader of Jaynes I find some of his comments extremely funny: Imagine if you tried to explain Thermodynamics using Bayes rule instead of doing what the Stat. Mech folks have done. Bayesian inference isn’t a method that’s acceptable for a hard science like physics. Perhaps the hand wavy stuff is acceptable for soft sciences like Psychology.

  3. Hello my friend! I wish to say that this post is awesome, nice written and come with almost all vital infos. I?¦d like to see extra posts like this .

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *