The second paragraph to the Declaration of Independence begins;

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

When the Founding Fathers wrote “We hold these truths to be self-evident” they meant that they were so obvious, everyone could understand them. When they wrote of “unalienable rights” they meant no one could take them away. Don’t confuse this concept with the idea that no one could give them up. Although you can’t have these rights taken from you against your will, you can choose to give them away. Sometimes you give them away simply by not protecting them. You may give them away by not being involved politically and electing people to office that think they know what’s best for you. That is entirely of your choosing.

The Constitution of the United States was passed in order to provide us with the legal structure needed to operate this new Country. Without first declaring our independence, our Constitution would not be valid. When considering what is in the Constitution, including the first ten Amendments known as the Bill of Rights, we must remain mindful of what our Founding Fathers wrote in the Declaration of Independence. These two documents are not mutually exclusive, they work hand in hand.

Within the Bill of Rights there has been much discussion on the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which says;

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.

Many people argue that this Amendment grants Americans the right to own (keep) and carry (bear) guns (arms), while others say it doesn’t allow individuals to keep guns at all. I believe that both sides misconstrue or misrepresent the purpose, and or meaning, of the Amendment. In fact, my contention is that the 2nd Amendment was never intended to grant us the right “to keep and bear arms”. I maintain that the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution acknowledges that the right already exists, as it warns the Federal Government not to infringe upon that right. During this period of our history, the term infringe meant to defeat or frustrate. The Founding Fathers were saying that people have the right to protect their life, liberty and pursuit of happiness and Congress was to make no laws which would make protecting those rights more difficult or impossible.

At the outset I quoted the part of the Declaration of Independence, where it states that there are “certain unalienable rights” which are bestowed by our Creator. The rights enumerated, “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” have one very important thread in common. All three require that, in order to enjoy them, people must have the ability to defend them. To demonstrate this we’ll look at “Life”, since everyone has life, it is the most obvious to all and the easiest to understand.

For the sake of argument, imagine yourself being stranded on an uncharted island belonging to absolutely no one. One day another creature, whether man or beast, comes along and tries to kill you, for whatever reason. Would you try to protect your right to live, or would you refuse to defend yourself and accept death? Obviously, in that situation, the only way to maintain your right to life would be by self-defense, even if forced to kill that which would seek to end your life. If your Creator did not grant you a right to self-defense, you would have no means by which you could keep your right to life. The same holds true for the rights to liberty and the pursuit of happiness. To keep them, you may be required to defend them. The right to “keep and bear arms” is absolutely essential to prevent your rights to “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” from being taken. They are not the only means you have to defend yourself and your rights, but there may be times when they’re the only effective choices.

There’s an old saying to the effect of “your right to swing your fist ends at the tip of my nose”. There is no inalienable right to infringe upon the rights of another and our laws are supposed to be designed to protect those that are abiding by the law while punishing those that are not. If someone tries to infringe on any of your rights, society may dictate that the guilty party relinquish some of their own rights as punishment. Depending on the crime, a part of that punishment may include losing the right to liberty, through incarceration, restrictions to what you can do and who you can associate with while on probation, “the right to keep and bear arms” and various other restrictions. Unless and until one is found guilty of violating the rights of another, no law should negatively impact a persons right to “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” or their ability to protect those rights.

More than ever, we need representatives, and judges, that understand that the right to keep and bear arms is simply an extension of the right to self-protection, that it is self-evident, and that they only have the right and duty to regulate it regarding criminal activities. Law abiding citizens should not be adversely affected by any such laws, including gun laws. Our representatives seem to have forgotten that all are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. When we elect representatives that don’t stand up for our rights, as written in our Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States, we have effectively given up those rights. For this we can only blame ourselves and that is another self-evident truth.