ShareThisLAS VEGAS - There's no doubt a chunk of the electorate is angry with the federal government. But are voters willing to take up arms?
In Nevada, Sharron Angle -- the Senate candidate who wants to unseat Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid --seemed to raise that specter in three interviews in the past six months, suggesting that some would seek "Second Amendment remedies" if Congress isn't reined in.
She said the purpose of the right to bear arms is to check the federal government. But she stopped short of saying that she would support an armed uprising.
"Our Founding Fathers, they put that Second Amendment in there for a good reason, and that was for the people to protect themselves against a tyrannical government," Angle told conservative talk show host Lars Larson in January. "In fact, Thomas Jefferson said it's good for a country to have a revolution every 20 years. I hope that's not where we're going, but you know, if this Congress keeps going the way it is, people are really looking toward those Second Amendment remedies."
Also that month, she told Reno conservative talk show host Bill Manders she hoped Reid would be defeated at the ballot box before the electorate resorted to more aggressive measures.
"I'm hoping that we're not getting to Second Amendment remedies," Angle said. "I hope that the vote will be the cure for the Harry Reid problems."
And last month she told the Reno Gazette-Journal "it's almost an imperative" that conservatives win.
"The nation is arming," she told the newspaper. "What are they arming for if it isn't that they are so distrustful of their government? They're afraid they'll have to fight for their liberty in more Second Amendment kinds of ways. That's why I look at this as almost an imperative. If we don't win at the ballot box, what will be the next step?"
Is she simply tapping into an intense mistrust of the federal government? Or is she advocating something?
Fred Lokken, a political scientist at Truckee Meadows Community College, said Angle has an obligation to explain what she means.
"She needs to assure us she's not advocating violence against our sitting government or those serving in the sitting government," he said.
Reid spokesman Jon Summers said, "Her rhetoric that if she doesn't win at the ballot box people should go to the bullet box undermines the Democratic process."
"We know people are upset," he added. "Clearly the economy isn't where it needs to be. The unemployment situation, the foreclosure situation, are not good. Sen. Reid is doing everything he can to turn it around."
Angle spokesman Jerry Stacy stressed that Angle is not "advocating for a revolution." But he didn't back away from Angle's comments that trouble could be brewing.
"We should all be worried, but again, she's not advocating or suggesting a revolution," Stacy said.
The armed revolt sentiment doesn't belong to Angle alone.
Rick Barber, a candidate in a Republican congressional runoff in Alabama, is airing an ad in which he appears to conspire with 18th-century revolutionaries to stage an armed revolt.
Angle said she prefers to fight at the ballot box, according to the Gazette-Journal interview.
"That's why I'm in the battle the way I'm in the battle," she said. "I still have a great deal of faith in our political system and a great deal of faith in the American people and voter."
John Chachas, who lost to Angle in the primary, said it's not necessarily an ill-advised campaign message, especially to her base. Although he is a self-described gun owner who "likes to kill things," Chachas said he was surprised by how intense the gun rights issue became on the campaign trail.
"It speaks volumes, it seems to me, to how imposed upon people in rural America feel by these things passed on a national level," he said. "It really has them up in arms. It has them really unhappy.
"You sort of see it on TV and might think, 'Oh, that's just Rachel Maddow and Keith Olbermann on one end and Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck on the other,' and convince yourself with some ease that it's a figment of media creation. It is not. It's deeply felt."
Bob List, a Republican national committeeman and former Nevada governor, wouldn't speculate on the meaning of Angle's comments. But, he said, "People are far more riled up about what's going on out there than I've ever seen in my lifetime.
Still, he said, he doesn't think an armed revolution is coming.
"What will happen is people will go to the ballot box and vote out the incumbents who are doing this," he said.
Larson, host of a nationally syndicated talk radio show, said he agreed with Angle's sentiment that the purpose of the Second Amendment is a check on the federal government.
"That doesn't mean she was advocating war if she loses," Larson said. "She was saying at some point, the purpose of the Second Amendment wasn't first for hunting, or personal protection. It was to make sure government never got out of control."
(Distributed by Scripps Howard News Service, www.scrippsnews.com.)
Must credit Las Vegas Sun
angle's gun angle
i thought the second amendment was to create a militia. when it was written there were enough enemies--indians, british--to require a local guard.
What? You must be a product
What? You must be a product of the modern education system! :-) Please read up on your history.
Yes, the 2nd Amendment still matters - right
I hope everyone here realizes that if the federal government did decide to come after you, all the 12-gauges and submachine guns in the world wouldn't do anything at all against the equipment they have.
So unless you believe the 2nd Amendment protects a citizen's right to own a few tank columns and launch ICBM's from his backyard, pretending that it's just as relevant today as it was in revolutionary times is pretty laughable.
I hope you understand that a
I hope you understand that a majority of the people in armed services are patriots of this country, and not mindless goverment drones that would kill American people for a corrupt goverment.
loyalty
One should read the history of America and the Veteran uprising after WWI, and the Kent State Massacre and every major strike in the nation where the police protect the companies and corporations instead of the people. There are enough kids in the army and the military that would fire on the citizens. Sorry but the fire power is on the Government side and the citizens will never win because the population is brainwashed to believe that the government can do nothing wrong. I often wonder why we have a Federal Education System, when up until shortly after the end of WWII education was in the hands of the State. Up until the end of WWII we were brainwashed in state education on religion and after WWII we were brainwashed in religion and government. We have never had a system where the citizens and the public were taught to think for them selves. Every election is a form of either idol worship or just plain propaganda and brainwashing and the media, mostly TV is responsible for giving the public music and entertainment instead of the facts of the world and national news and situation that really effect them. Illiteracy is a big pproblem and probably the downfall of the American citizen and America.
Thomas Jefferson? Are you
Thomas Jefferson? Are you joking? You represent yourself as a patriot -- and perhaps someone in the armed forces -- and yet you would not defend the elected government against an insurrection? George Washington himself was prepared to use armed force to combat domestic insurrection (the Whiskey Rebellion). This is what the likes of Sharron Angle are talking about -- taking up arms against an elected government because they don't like its policies. There is no constitutional basis for such action, which is illegal and treasonous. Every one of the claims of such people concerns "the Harry Reid problem," or the "Obama agenda." These folks are not even capable of articulating what it is they wish to take up arms against. They're just angry.
technology not a factor
The us military is going to bomb US cities? How ignorant of you.
I know the Constitution and
I know the Constitution and it's amendment's are to protect the people from a corrupt government.
You may well know the
You may well know the constitution and the amentments to it, BUT you are not the Commie in the White House trying to push it out of your way. WE THE PEOPLE need to push back as hard as we can. I hope that push is limited to the ballot box, but if things get too far out of hand some may try other methods.
Constitutional Scholar?
I didn't realize Ms.Angle is an expert on the constitution.
"She was saying at some point, the purpose of the Second Amendment wasn't first for hunting, or personal protection. It was to make sure government never got out of control."
Can someone show me this language in the Constitution?
I'll wait.....
Guset I think I see your
Guset I think I see your problem. You seem to like to have others do you work. You should go read the Constitution and the Federalist Papers and you can answer many of your own questions, not to mention the wealth of knowledge that you will gain.
You might even be able to figure out just how out of control the government has become.
This applies to everyone here who is under the impression that the constitution does not provide remedy for a tyrannical government.
Ms. Angle is 100% correct in her statement.
Why vote when all you do is threaten?
So... if the government is so "out of control" and all you have is threats, why vote ? Why not just take over Nevada and declare Sharron Angle the "Empress of Nevada" ?
The remedy for bad government is elections. If democracy is not for you, then feel free to leave this democracy.
The US is a republic and not
The US is a republic and not a democracy. The founding father put the 2nd amendment in the constitution because they had just escaped from a tyrannical government and wanted to insure that the same thing never happened in this country.
If you have ever had a proper history class it was the colonist that took up arms against the British in order to escape their government. The 2nd amendment insures our right to have the capacity to do that again IF NECESSARY.
This year our government, the democrats along with a few republicans voted a cost onto people for doing nothing but being alive. That's exactly what Obamacare does. The other republicans in office sat back and smirked and allowed them to get away with it because they were sure that those that voted for it would get voted out of office rather than doing all that they could to insure it never passed. Not a single one of them worked half as hard as Obama did in getting it passed.
The current government is out of control. Democrats are spending out money faster than they can collect it. Just within the past 24 hours they voted out a bill introduced by republicans that would extend payments for unemployment and at the same time reduce the deficit in favor the alternative which extended payments but increases the deficit.
This current economic crisis was brought about by people that are living their life the same way that government is governing the economy of this country. Meaning that people are spending more than they make just like this country is doing!!! It has got to stop.
Vote them all out and let's start over from scratch.
More lies from conservatives
The GOP bankrupted the country while sending troops to Iraq so Dick Chaney and the GOP could profit while US soldiers died.
You need to work harder so the tax breaks for the top 1% can be funded.
At least you advocate elections. Again, democratic process means the PEOPLE elect representatives. Please review your civics class from middle school.
why vote...
It is not a democracy! It is a democratic republic. That means that we elect representatives to do our governmental work for us. The problem is that the representatives now think that we work for them--they have promoted themselves to the 'ruling class'. That is something we dumped in 1776. It is beginning to look like we will have to do it again before 2012--especially if wannabee World-Supreme-Potentate O**** and Queen Clinton try to ram the U.N. Treaty On Small Arms down our throats before the elections in November 2010.
Sic Semper Tyrannis!
Try taking it in context
THE FOUNDERS, NOT THE NRA, ORIGINATED THE "MYTH" OF THE PEOPLE ARMED AND FREE
by Stephen P. Halbrook, Ph.D., J.D.
www.stephenhalbrook.com
So, argues Michael Bellesiles in Arming America, it was the Great Satan NRA which invented the myth that the Founders were armed and free, when in reality almost no one in those days owned a firearm. For a reality check, what the Founders actually said is superior to inferences piled upon inferences from probate records.
Charles Lee, the influential Revolutionary patriot, wrote in an article published throughout the colonies in 1775: "The yeomanry of America besides infinite advantages over the peasantry of other countries, are accustomed from their infancy to firearms; they are expert in the use of them. Whereas the lower and middle people of England, are, by the tyranny of certain laws, almost as ignorant in the use of a musket, as they are of the ancient Catapulta." Quoted in Stephen P. Halbrook, A Right to Bear Arms (Greenwood Press 1989), 11.
John Zubly`s Great Britain`s Right to Tax . . . By A Swiss (1775), an influential pamphlet in the colonies, heralded the American militiamen`s stand at Lexington against British regulars and deplored General Gage`s tricking of the people of Boston into surrendering some of their arms on a false promise to allow them to depart the city. Zubly noted that "in a strong sense of liberty, and the use of fire-arms almost from the cradle, the Americans have vastly the advantage over men of their rank almost every where else."
And then there is James Madison, who in The Federalist (1788) contended that "the ultimate authority . . . resides in the people alone." Should tyranny emerge, to a regular army of the United States government "would be opposed a militia amounting to near half a million citizens with arms in their hands." Alluding to "the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation," Madison continued: "Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms." For lots more of the same, see Halbrook, That Every Man Be Armed: The Evolution of a Constitutional Right (Oakland, Ca.: Independent Institute, 1994).
Almost every civil servent
Almost every civil servent and every member of Congress, Military and Govrnment Official as sworn a oath to protect the Constitution you do not have to be a scholar or a lawyer to know what the simple document means.
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
These are the words that she is referencing we teh people have rights over the goverment.
Constitution
They wrote it with that EXACT intention because they just fought a war with the most powerful nation and won with their personal arms. The government was the biggest fear of the time. Show me in the constitution where it OK's the federal government to take 30% or more of my paycheck.... I'll wait......Here is mine in BLACK AND WHITE!
"being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Who else would the "state" have to fear OTHER than the US government?.... oh yea Illegals....
It's in the Declaration of
It's in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. Learn to read and stop believing the muck being force fed to you. You are a primme example of a mindless sheep. You're part of the problem
Second Amendment
Our founding Fathers were wise beyond centuries. It is time we stand up and take back OUR government, elected by the We The People, for the People. Fill out your applications folks...
By "OUR government" I assume
By "OUR government" I assume you mean all of us participating citizens here in the USA. I'm pretty sure our country had an election last year and the majority won, hence it is our government and all of us can participate. I'm pretty sure you don't intend to marginalize, criminalize or forcibly incarcerate those you disagree with, do you?
Taking Up Arms Against America???
Where is this nutty woman coming from? Have we become a group of tribes and clans?
Her talk (threats) is absolutely crazy and promotes this. Do not allow this type of talk from anybody without seriously thinking about the consequesces.
Tree of Liberty
The TREE OF LIBERTY needs to be renewed with the blood of patriots from time to time.
AND YES MANY PATRIOTS ARE WILLING TO TAKE ARMS AGAINST A TYRANNICAL GOVERNMENT BE IT OURS OR OTHERS.
I just hope that the Men and Women in ARMED SERVICES remember enemies Foriegn and Domestic. If ever they get called upon to quash a rebelion that if the goverment is the enemy of the people they are the enemy not the people.
We do have a revolution in
We do have a revolution in this country. Every time an election is held.
If you don't like how the democratic process works, take your retoric to a county that dosn't give it's citisens the chance to completely change their government every four and six years.
To call for a bloody revolution in a democratic nation is irresoponsible and irrational.
Any nation who's Supreme
Any nation who's Supreme Court declares corporations to have the same rights as citizens is no longer a democracy
AMEN. First try and vote the
AMEN. First try and vote the corruption out but if that does not work...
If that does not work, then
If that does not work, then you try again. Just because you cant sway people to your side of an issue dosn't give you the right to use violence to change their minds. All that does is make a criminal.
Just like Iran, Venezuela,
Just like Iran, Venezuela, and so many other "democracies". Just because they let us vote does not mean we actually choose!
Enemies foreign and domestic
Enemies foreign and domestic? Since the current government was elected by the majority of the voters, doesn’t that make these folks, who are suggesting insurrection, our domestic enemies? Does that mean we (the folks aligned with the legitimate government) should take second amendment action against them? Can we just herd them into concentration camps instead? I hate to be seen as someone threatening murder because I can have my way on everything.
Maybe we need a scoring system to count the number of folks 'managed' by second amendment rights.
Euphemisms used to suggest murdering folks that out voted you, is still suggesting murder. Such behavior should be prosecuted.
To answer your question: NO A
To answer your question: NO
A parable to issistrate the point:
If the President, Speaker of the House, and Pesident of the Senate decided to declare themselves Kings, Queens, and Ministers over our country, and rule the people and take away our cinstitutional rights. The military is not run by the Goverment for the Government, but by the President financially approved of by congress for the People.
Furthermore Jack, This Goverment was not elected by a majority of the people, the majority of the people still don't vote.
Wow and what if youi voted for the people in office but they lied, bought thier way into office and you found that out and changed your mind.