TemplarKormac
Political Atheist
In crafting our existing constitution, the founders took pointers from Sir William Blackstone's commentaries on the Law of England. The 2nd Amendment was majorly written in part due to these key points. Guns are and should be used for self defense, and in so doing preserves life, liberty, property and happiness. Liberals say that only militias have the preclusive right to bear arms. So why do these points suggest otherwise?
http://oll.libertyfund.org/?option=...tle=2140&chapter=198653&layout=html&Itemid=27 Link Added. Link Each Copy and Paste To It's Source.
The right of personal security consists in a person's legal and uninterrupted enjoyment of his life, his limbs, his body, his health, and his reputation.
Sir William Blackstone's Commentaries of English Law, Volume 1, Page 125
A man's limbs (by which for the present we only understand those members which may be useful to him in fight, and the loss of which only amounts to mayhem by the common law) are also the
gift of the wife creator; to enable man to protect himself from external injuries in a state of nature. To therefore he has a natural inherent right; and they cannot be wantonly destroyed
or disabled without a manifest breach of civil liberty.
Both the life and limbs of a man are of such high value, in the estimation of the law of England that it pardons even homicide if committed se defendendo, or in order to preserve them. For
whatever is done by a man, to save either life or member, is looked upon as done upon the highest necessity and compulsion. Therefore if a man through fear of death or mayhem is prevailed
to execute a deed, or do any other legal act; these, though accompanied with all other the requisite solemnities, are totally void in law, if forced upon him by a well grounded apprehension
of losing his life, or even his limbs, in case of his non-compliance. And in the same is also sufficient to excuse for the commission of many misdemeanors, as will appear in the fourth book.
Sir William Blackstone's Commentaries of English law, Volume 1, Page 126
The constraint a man is under in these circumstances is called in law duress from the Latin durities of which there are two forts; duress of imprisonment, where a man actually
loses his liberty, of which we shall presently speak; and duress per minas, where the hardship is only threatened and impending, which is that we are now discoursing of. Duress
per minas is either for loss of life, or else for fear of mayhem, or loss of limb. And this fear must be upon sufficient reason; "non" as Bracton expresses it, "suspicio
cujuslibet vani et meticulosi hominis, sed talis qui possit cadere in virum constantem; talis enim debet esse metus, que in se contineat vitae periculum, aut corporis cruciatum." A fear
of batter or being beaten though never so well grounded is no duress; neither is the fear of having one's house burnt, or one's goods taken away and destroyed; because in these cases should
the threat be performed, a man may have satisfaction by recovering equivalent damages: but no suitable atonement can be made for the loss of life, or limb. And the indulgence shewn to a man
under this, the principal, fort of duress, the fear of losing his life or limbs, agrees also with that maxim of the civil law; ignoscitur ei qui sanguinem suum qualiter redemptum
voluit.
Sir William Blackstone's Commentaries of English Law, Volume 1, Page 127
This natural life being, as was before observed, the immediate donation of the great creator, cannot be legally disposed of by any individual, neither by the person himself nor by any other
of his fellow creatures, merely upon their own authority. Yet nevertheless it may, by the divine permission, be frequently forfeited for the breach of those laws of society, which are
enforced by the sanction of capital punishments; of the nature, restrictions, expedience, and legality of which, we may hereafter more conveniently enquire in the concluding book of these
commentaries. At present I shall only observe that whenever the constitution of a state vests in any man, or body of men, a power of destroying at pleasure, without the direction
of laws, the lives or members of the subject, such constitution is in the highest degree of tyrannical: and that whenever any laws direct such destruction for light and trivial
causes, such laws are likewise tyrannical, though in an inferior degree; because here the subject is aware of the danger he is exposed to, and may by prudent caution provide against it. The
statute law of England does therefore very seldom, and the common law does never, inflict any punishment extending to life or limb, unless upon the highest necessity: and the constitution
is an utter stranger to any arbitrary power of killing or maiming the subject without the express warrant of law. "Nullus liber homo, says the great charter, aliquo modo
destruatur, nisi per legale judicium parium suorum aut per legem tarrae. Which words, "aliquo modo destruatur," according to Sir Edward Coke, include a prohibition not only of
killing, and maiming but also torturing, (to which our laws are strangers) and of every oppression by color of an illegal authority. And it is enacted by the statute 5
Edw. III c.9. that no man shall be forejudged of life or limb, contrary to the great charter and the law of the land: and again by statute 28 Ed. III. c.3. that no man shall be put to death
without being brought to answer by due process of law.
Sir William Blackstone's Commentaries of English law, Volume 1, Page 129-30
3. Besides those limbs and member that may be necessary to man, in order to defend himself or annoy his enemy, the rest of his person or body is also entitled by same natural right to
security from the corporal insults of menaces, assaults, beating, and wounding; though such insults amount not to to destruction of life or member.
4.The preservation of a man's health from such practices as may prejudice or annoy it, and
5.The security of his reputation or good name from the arts of detraction and slander, are rights to which every man is entitled, by reason and natural justice; since without these it is
impossible to have the perfect enjoyment of any other advantage or right. But these last articles (being of much less importance than those which have gone before, and those which are yet
to come) it will suffice to have barely mentioned among the rights of persons; referring to the more minute discussion of their several branches, to those parts of our commentaries which
treat of the infringement of these rights under the head of personal wrongs.
II. Next to personal security, the law of England regards, asserts, and preserves the personal liberty of individuals. This personal liberty consists in the power of locomotion, of changing
situation, or removing one's person to whatsoever place one's own inclination may direct; without imprisonment or restraint, unless by due course of law. Concerning of which we may take the
same observations as upon the preceding article; that it is a right strictly natural that the laws of England have never abridged it without sufficient cause; and, that in this kingdom it
cannot ever be abridged at the mere discretion of the magistrate, without the explicit permission of the laws. Here again the language of the great charter is, that no free man shall be
taken or imprisoned, but by the lawful judgment of his equals, or by the law of the land.
Sir William Blackstone's Commentaries of English Law, Volume 1, Page 133
http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...ndment-refutes-all-gun-control-arguments.html ******** Merged Posts.
http://oll.libertyfund.org/?option=...tle=2140&chapter=198653&layout=html&Itemid=27 Link Added. Link Each Copy and Paste To It's Source.
The right of personal security consists in a person's legal and uninterrupted enjoyment of his life, his limbs, his body, his health, and his reputation.
Sir William Blackstone's Commentaries of English Law, Volume 1, Page 125
A man's limbs (by which for the present we only understand those members which may be useful to him in fight, and the loss of which only amounts to mayhem by the common law) are also the
gift of the wife creator; to enable man to protect himself from external injuries in a state of nature. To therefore he has a natural inherent right; and they cannot be wantonly destroyed
or disabled without a manifest breach of civil liberty.
Both the life and limbs of a man are of such high value, in the estimation of the law of England that it pardons even homicide if committed se defendendo, or in order to preserve them. For
whatever is done by a man, to save either life or member, is looked upon as done upon the highest necessity and compulsion. Therefore if a man through fear of death or mayhem is prevailed
to execute a deed, or do any other legal act; these, though accompanied with all other the requisite solemnities, are totally void in law, if forced upon him by a well grounded apprehension
of losing his life, or even his limbs, in case of his non-compliance. And in the same is also sufficient to excuse for the commission of many misdemeanors, as will appear in the fourth book.
Sir William Blackstone's Commentaries of English law, Volume 1, Page 126
The constraint a man is under in these circumstances is called in law duress from the Latin durities of which there are two forts; duress of imprisonment, where a man actually
loses his liberty, of which we shall presently speak; and duress per minas, where the hardship is only threatened and impending, which is that we are now discoursing of. Duress
per minas is either for loss of life, or else for fear of mayhem, or loss of limb. And this fear must be upon sufficient reason; "non" as Bracton expresses it, "suspicio
cujuslibet vani et meticulosi hominis, sed talis qui possit cadere in virum constantem; talis enim debet esse metus, que in se contineat vitae periculum, aut corporis cruciatum." A fear
of batter or being beaten though never so well grounded is no duress; neither is the fear of having one's house burnt, or one's goods taken away and destroyed; because in these cases should
the threat be performed, a man may have satisfaction by recovering equivalent damages: but no suitable atonement can be made for the loss of life, or limb. And the indulgence shewn to a man
under this, the principal, fort of duress, the fear of losing his life or limbs, agrees also with that maxim of the civil law; ignoscitur ei qui sanguinem suum qualiter redemptum
voluit.
Sir William Blackstone's Commentaries of English Law, Volume 1, Page 127
This natural life being, as was before observed, the immediate donation of the great creator, cannot be legally disposed of by any individual, neither by the person himself nor by any other
of his fellow creatures, merely upon their own authority. Yet nevertheless it may, by the divine permission, be frequently forfeited for the breach of those laws of society, which are
enforced by the sanction of capital punishments; of the nature, restrictions, expedience, and legality of which, we may hereafter more conveniently enquire in the concluding book of these
commentaries. At present I shall only observe that whenever the constitution of a state vests in any man, or body of men, a power of destroying at pleasure, without the direction
of laws, the lives or members of the subject, such constitution is in the highest degree of tyrannical: and that whenever any laws direct such destruction for light and trivial
causes, such laws are likewise tyrannical, though in an inferior degree; because here the subject is aware of the danger he is exposed to, and may by prudent caution provide against it. The
statute law of England does therefore very seldom, and the common law does never, inflict any punishment extending to life or limb, unless upon the highest necessity: and the constitution
is an utter stranger to any arbitrary power of killing or maiming the subject without the express warrant of law. "Nullus liber homo, says the great charter, aliquo modo
destruatur, nisi per legale judicium parium suorum aut per legem tarrae. Which words, "aliquo modo destruatur," according to Sir Edward Coke, include a prohibition not only of
killing, and maiming but also torturing, (to which our laws are strangers) and of every oppression by color of an illegal authority. And it is enacted by the statute 5
Edw. III c.9. that no man shall be forejudged of life or limb, contrary to the great charter and the law of the land: and again by statute 28 Ed. III. c.3. that no man shall be put to death
without being brought to answer by due process of law.
Sir William Blackstone's Commentaries of English law, Volume 1, Page 129-30
3. Besides those limbs and member that may be necessary to man, in order to defend himself or annoy his enemy, the rest of his person or body is also entitled by same natural right to
security from the corporal insults of menaces, assaults, beating, and wounding; though such insults amount not to to destruction of life or member.
4.The preservation of a man's health from such practices as may prejudice or annoy it, and
5.The security of his reputation or good name from the arts of detraction and slander, are rights to which every man is entitled, by reason and natural justice; since without these it is
impossible to have the perfect enjoyment of any other advantage or right. But these last articles (being of much less importance than those which have gone before, and those which are yet
to come) it will suffice to have barely mentioned among the rights of persons; referring to the more minute discussion of their several branches, to those parts of our commentaries which
treat of the infringement of these rights under the head of personal wrongs.
II. Next to personal security, the law of England regards, asserts, and preserves the personal liberty of individuals. This personal liberty consists in the power of locomotion, of changing
situation, or removing one's person to whatsoever place one's own inclination may direct; without imprisonment or restraint, unless by due course of law. Concerning of which we may take the
same observations as upon the preceding article; that it is a right strictly natural that the laws of England have never abridged it without sufficient cause; and, that in this kingdom it
cannot ever be abridged at the mere discretion of the magistrate, without the explicit permission of the laws. Here again the language of the great charter is, that no free man shall be
taken or imprisoned, but by the lawful judgment of his equals, or by the law of the land.
Sir William Blackstone's Commentaries of English Law, Volume 1, Page 133
http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...ndment-refutes-all-gun-control-arguments.html ******** Merged Posts.
When things go bumping in the night 
for sur!
