It is radicle to interpret the 2nd amendment to mean that the INDIVIDUAL is guaranteed the right to bear arms in order to overthrow the government whenever he rationalizes he is protecting his individual liberty.
No one has stated this except YOU!
What you are doing is twisting the words of Sen. Cruz in order to make you inane point. You are inferring things that were not said.
And... Constitution's Bill of Rights applies to individuals! Yes,
the 2nd Amendment applies to individuals who do have the right to defend their property and ultimately, their country in the event of a tyrannical overthrow of government in order to restore democracy. I'm sorry if you don't think we should have the right to defend our country from the overthrow of tyrants. I suggest you move to China or Russia where people have no freedom or rights.
Not according to the Federalist Papers, as you well know!
The amendment’s author, Federalist James Madison, articulated that its purpose was to split the military power of the new nation between the states and the federal government. But he also made it clear that any opposition to federal tyranny would come from state militia forces “conducted by governments possessing their affections and confidence.”
But he also made it clear that any opposition to federal tyranny would come from state militia forces...
Hence the phrase "well-formed militia" in the 2nd Amendment.
Has Cruz said anything about citizens taking up arms against the government? No.
I know Madison better than you, I can assure you. What you are now trying to do is sidle up to Madison's argument for strong state militias as if that somehow makes your argument that Cruz opposes Madison. Who the hell do you think state militias are made of? Foreigners?
The individual right to bear arms is made in the argument for strong state militias.
I don't think Ted Cruz thinks individual people ought to have the right to revolt and overthrow the government on their own without the state. If you have something he has said to that effect, you are more than welcome to show us. Trying to twist and distort his comments out of context by doing some pretty amazing acrobatics is not going to work.
The radical extremist Crus never once mentioned the state, not a single time, but mentioned the individual 4 times. His subject line for his insurrectionist rant was, "2nd Amendment against tyranny."
The idea that guns protect Americans against government encroachment is a dangerously slippery one. One man’s liberty encroachment is another man’s law enforcement, ala Bundy ranch. Such a view when it boils down to it is not the philosophy of patriotic citizens ready to defend their liberties-no matter how it is presented. It is, in truth, part and parcel of a terrorist ideology.
Every suicide bomber can, after all, use the same excuse. Casting aside the democratic system altogether, disregarding the power of representative government, ignoring the law of the land for the sake of a noble truth, indisputable right or principle, all of these things belong to the terrorist mentality. History gives us plenty of proof that fighting tyrants is the creed of most political terrorists. John Wilkes Booth, for example, after murdering the president in cold blood at Ford's Theatre, Booth lept down to the stage and shouted at the audience, "Sic semper tyrannis" which means in Latin "Thus always to tyrants."
