By David Risselada •
For years the idea of an Article V convention of the states has been pushed by many conservatives as a way to reign in federal spending and an out of control federal government. An Article V convention is a way to propose new amendments to the constitution, a provision added by our founders as a way to ensure the people have the ability to take control of their governing process. Any new amendments, once proposed, must then be ratified by three fourths of the states legislatures in order to become the law of the land. Conservatives argue, that because Republicans control the majority of the state legislatures, precious liberties protected by the constitution, such as the right to keep and bear arms, would be in no danger. This has proven to be false as The New American Magazine is reporting that a “clarification” of the Second Amendments meaning is on the agenda should an Article V convention take place.
What does it mean to clarify the Second Amendments meaning? Well, many gun control proponents point out, as The New American highlights, that the Second Amendment was written at a time when only muskets and other arms of less lethal ability existed. Their arguments would of course suggest that the founders had no idea what direction technology would go and what type of arms would then be available to the public. On the other hand, if a pro-Second Amendment majority is present at the convention, clarifying the right to keep and bear arms could in deed do just that. They could re-affirm that an armed public is the best way to ensure the security of a free state. This however, in our politically charged climate of fear and hysteria against guns, is not likely.
Setting these idle arguments aside there are more serious threats that an Article V convention poses to the Second Amendment. One of these threats is the fact that gun control, and the disarming of America has been written into public law since 1961. Signed by President Kennedy, PL87-297 Arms Control and Disarmament Act sets in motion the process in which America’s military will be systematically reduced, disarmed and subverted to the authority of a world army headed by The United Nations. According to Bernadine Smith of libertygunrights.com, the final stages of this plan would be the elimination of national control of our armed services, which in turn would subvert our national sovereignty, and the total and complete disarming of the American people.
The American public seems blissfully unaware that the past several decades have brought us a massive, systematic reduction in the size of our military and the closure of many bases nationwide.
Also, the process for turning over command of the U.S. military to the United Nations started nearly two decades before with the passing of the United Nations Participation Act. This act put the power of committing U.S. forces to conflicts overseas in the hands of the U.N. Security Council as opposed to the U.S. congress, who incidentally constitutionally speaking, has the sole authority to declare war. Since the Korean war, all conflicts involving U.S. forces have been directed by the United Nations Security Council.
State Department Publication 7277 states as one of it’s goals the total and complete disarmament of military forces except for that which is necessary to maintain internal order and for contributions to a United Nations peace keeping force. This essentially means that only a small body of armed forces operating under the jurisdiction of the United Nations would exist for the purpose of enforcing principles set forth by a world governing body.
2. To put in place, where they do not exist, adequate laws, regulations and administrative procedures to exercise effective control over the production of small arms and light weapons within their areas of jurisdiction and over the export, import, transit or retransfer of such weapons, in order to prevent illegal manufacture of and illicit trafficking in small arms and light weapons, or their diversion to unauthorized recipients.
3. To adopt and implement, in the States that have not already done so, the necessary legislative or other measures to establish as criminal offences under their domestic law the illegal manufacture, possession, stockpiling and trade of small arms and light weapons within their areas of jurisdiction, in order to ensure that those engaged in such activities can be prosecuted under appropriate national penal codes.
David Risselada is a former U.S. Serviceman, commentator, and author of the book “Not on My Watch: Exposing the Marxist Agenda in Education.”