Quotes About Arms

We've made some good beginnings with the New START Treaty, but a lot more can be done.

Grave security concerns can arise as a result of demographic trends, chronic poverty, economic inequality, environmental degradation, pandemic diseases, organized crime, repressive governance and other developments no state can control alone. Arms can't address such concerns.

It behooves a prudent person to make trial of everything before arms.

I love the freedoms we got in this country, I appreciate your freedom to burn your flag if you want to, but I really appreciate my right to bear arms so I can shoot you if you try to burn mine.

Every noon as the clock hands arrive at twelve, I want to tie the two arms together, And walk out of the bank carrying time in bags.

The balance of power is the scale of peace. The same balance would be preserved were all the world destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay them aside.… Horrid mischief would ensue were one half the world deprived of the use of them; … the weak will become a prey to the strong.

This argument—"We are all of us carried along by a fiery zeal to recover our liberty; our arms cannot be wrested from our hands,"97—was a politico-military ideal but an inaccurate prediction, for both Cicero and the Roman republic, in part due to the inferiority of their arms, were killed within the year by Caesar's standing army.

Patrick Henry shot back that the power to resist oppression rests upon the right to possess arms: Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined.

The establishment of a militia, which is putting arms in the hands of the people, for their defence, was a point which the patriots lately carried in the mother country, and contended for, as essential to the preservation of their liberties.

Patrick Henry retorted in a single argument asserting both the individual right to have arms and the state power to encourage a militia consisting of the armed populace: May we not discipline and arm them, as well as Congress, if the power be concurrent? So that our militia shall have two sets of arms, double sets of regimentals, & c.; and thus, at a very great cost, we shall be doubly armed. The great object is, that every man be armed.

Even so, the right of a pacifist not to bear arms was recognized too: "No person who is conscientiously scrupulous about the lawfulness of bearing arms, shall be compelled thereto, provided he will pay an equivalent."98 To be sure, the Bill of Rights had limits. The Protestant religion was state supported, and only Christians "shall be equally under the protection of the law."99 Freedom of speech was recognized only in the legislature.

One of the final speeches, and the final word on the right to have arms, was by Zachariah Johnson, who observed that the new Constitution could never result in religious persecution or other oppression. He added: "The people are not to be disarmed of their weapons.

The Virginia Declaration did not mention the right to assemble and to petition at all; it protected a free press but neglected free speech; and it included the above militia language but not the right to keep and bear arms. Also new was the allowance that standing armies should be avoided only "as far as" possible. The author apparent was George Mason, who simply added these new clauses to the Declaration's language he had drafted in 1776.

Boys on horseback resupplied the militia.31 Militiamen on the way to Lexington and Concord stopped at a farm in Braintree, Massachusetts. To their amusement, 8-year-old John Quincy Adams, son of Abigail and John Adams, was executing the manual of arms with a musket taller than he was.

By contrast, freedom of religion sparked controversy. When Benjamin Franklin revised the Declaration of Rights, he suggested no change in the right to bear arms clause yet unsuccessfully opposed the profession of faith required for assemblymen.94 Newspaper attacks on the religious guarantees and certain other matters were extreme and persistent, but bearing arms was not questioned.

Timothy Dwight, a chaplain in the Connecticut Continental Brigade during the Revolution and later president of Yale College, would write: "The people of New-England have always had, and have by law always been required to have, arms in their hands. Every man is, or ought to be, in the possession of a musket." Yet he did not know of "a single instance, in which arms have been the instruments of carrying on a private quarrel."121

The British attempt to disarm the militiamen and other inhabitants at Lexington and Concord could be regarded as a milestone in Second Amendment historiography. It undoubtedly helped inspire recognition of the right to keep and bear arms. Indeed, virtually every citizen was a militiaman who owned and kept his firearms at home, and the British sought to seize these private arms, as well as the stores of gunpowder and cannon held by the towns or controlled by committees of safety.

It is a natural right which the people have reserved to themselves, confirmed by the Bill of Rights, to keep arms for their own defence; and as Mr. Blackstone observes, it is to be made use of when the sanctions of society and law are found insufficient to restrain the violence of oppression.

The Crown's attempts to disarm the colonists as a contributing grievance in the chain of events leading to the American Revolution and the imperative of guaranteeing the right to have arms in bills of rights are themes that pervade the thinking of the Founders' generation.

Madison thus saw the rights he would propose, such as freedom of the press and keeping and bearing arms, as not involving the structure or powers of government but as involving private rights. The "fallacy" of the English Declaration was that it was a mere legislative act that Parliament could repeal; by contrast, the American bill of rights would be part of the Constitution and not subject to repeal by Congress

The same debate was simmering in the Continental Congress. George Washington noted that "I did not think myself Authorised to seize upon any Arms the property of private Person; but if they can be collected and the owners satisfied for them, it would be of very essential service.

It is a natural right which the people have reserved to themselves, confirmed by the Bill of Rights, to keep arms for their own defence; and as Mr. Blackstone observes, it is to be made use of when the sanctions of society and law are found insufficient to restrain the violence of oppression.64

Thus, "the people" had a right to religious freedom and to have arms. Regarding the latter, New York followed Virginia in beginning with the declaration "that the people have a right to keep and bear arms," and then including a separate clause declaring the militia to be necessary for a free state. While Virginia referred to the militia as "composed of the body of the people, trained to arms,"27 New York characterized the militia as "including the body of the people capable of bearing arms.

Jackson opined that anyone objecting to militia duty should pay an equivalent, for "bearing arms was one of the most important duties we owe to society. One great object men have in view, by forming themselves into a state of civil society, is to protect their persons and property; to afford this protection it is necessary . . . that every one either give his personal assistance, or pay an equivalent for it.