I think that how a public servant or politician, two different animals, views your 2A

rights is a direct reflection of how they look at any of your Creator endowed

rights. If they think they can limit your magazine capacity, then they also think you

are not free to speak. If they think you cannot protect yourself and family in a

park or other public place, they also think they can come into your home and

search without a warrant. Very basically, Shall Not Be Infringed is simple and

indicative of the absolute intent of our Founders regarding the entire Bill of

Rights. If our rights are indeed granted us by Almighty God as our Founders

asserted in the Declaration of Independence, then civil government cannot

assume authority over your rights outside the due process of justice.

A review of the actions by many in Nashville regarding the Hughes v Lee ruling is

indicative of men who think they can impose infringements God has not granted

them the authority to impose. Their use of your dollars to work against your

liberty is concerning and revealing. Their apparent reliance upon case law

decisions as the final arbiter of their decision to appeal the court’s favorable to

liberty ruling rather than interpret such through a lens of the clear words in the Bill

of Rights is troubling.

Our 2A right to keep and bear arms is about holding a tyrannical government at

bay. It is assumed in such that the citizen holds a natural law right of self-

preservation. And if civil government, outside the bounds of its moral authority

and constitutional designation, assumes it can arbitrarily deny you any portion of

exercise of such right to protect yourself or press back on tyranny, then none of

your rights are secure. If that slippery slope is taken, we become peasants

begging for privilege from potentates rather than free men acting in Liberty before

God.