Esteemed Senators and Representatives:
As featured prominently in a front-page article in USA Today earlier this week, (
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2008-02-26-gu
ns-cover_N.htm ) the US Supreme Court is about to take up the
Heller case regarding the rights of inhabitants of the District of Columbia to "keep and bear arms". Many in the media and in politics expect the Supreme Court to rule on whether the Second Amendment to the US Constitution preserves an individual right to arms, or a "collective right". Any such decision will have far-reaching effects on all Americans, including Georgians.
The Consitution of the State of Georgia references the right to bear arms in Article 1, Section 1, entitled "
Rights of Persons". It is plain from the inclusion of the right to bear arms in this particular section of the Georgia Constitution that the State of Georgia clearly understands the right to bear arms as a personal, individual right. Further, the Georgia Constitution replicates the wording used in the US Constitution, "the right of the people to keep and bear arms".
In the interests of defending the unalienable, God-given right of Americans -- including Georgians -- to exercise their personal, individual liberty with respect to the ownership and carriage of arms, I hereby call upon you as the elected representatives of the State of Georgia to communicate by resolution or letter to the US Supreme Court the offical stance of the Georgia Legislature -- which is plainly that the Second Amendment to the US Constitution clearly intends to preserve an individual right.
The very notion that our unalienable rights are granted to us by our Creator defies any interpretation of "collective" rights. God creates us as individuals, not as a collective - for our rights to be granted by our Creator, as stated in the Declaration of Independence, they
must be granted to us as individuals. The notion of a "collective" right denies the right of the individual, and if no individual is entitled to a given right or privilege, then the simple rules of logic tell us that no collection, or collective, of individuals can properly claim a right that does not belong to every individual.
I remind elected officials everywhere that all power emanates from the People. The Constitutions of our State and Federal governments are the contracts by which the people agree to delegate powers to such governments; no government can have a legitimate claim to any power unless explicitly granted by the people. For the courts to deny what are plainly individual, God-given rights to the people under the false rubric of a doctrine of "collective rights" constitutes
unilateral breach of contract on the part of whatever government is represented by such a court. The people will not long tolerate such breach of contract, and may be moved to secure their rights again, using the traditional remedies defined by the Declaration of Independence with regard to usurpations of tyrants.
The Supreme Court must be warned that any finding inconsistent with the Declaration's doctrine of unalienable, God-given individual rights will render the authority of the Court null and void and lead to untold hardship, suffering, and potentially violence, as the people move to once again secure their rights against tyranny.
The Founders were clear: the Second Amendment is intended to stand as the last bulwark against tyrannical government, to preserve the option of the People to appeal to force, if necessary, to secure their rights against usurpers.
Members of the Montana legislature have seen fit to file an
Amicus brief with the Court in regard to the Heller case, to remind the court that the State of Montana obtained a clear understanding in 1889 - when applying for statehood - that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right. As a reflection of this, Montana's Constitution states that the right of "
any person" to keep and bear arms "shall not be called into question". The federal government agreed in 1889 that such wording is consistent with the intent and meaning of the Second Amendment - and neither the wording of Montana's Constitution, nor the US Constitution, has changed in the intervening years. Those legislators notified the US Supreme Court that any finding to the contrary will consititute a breach of contract on the part of the United States, and that Montana will pursue "
all available remedies" to correct the breach. I trust I need not point out that "all available remedies" includes the right of
Secession.
I urge you in the strongest possible terms to work with your colleagues in the Legislature to frame, approve, and transmit a similar, strongly worded admonition to the Court that the State of Georgia will not tolerate any abrogation of it's citizens' rights by the Supreme Court. I remind you that the duty and purpose of all government in our great land is to
secure the unalienable rights of the people, and that all such governments were chartered for that
explicit purpose, by the people: a failure to perform that duty entitles the People to revoke the charter of
any government that fails them in this regard.
