No Constitutional Authority to Limit Arms

Remember when everyone understood that our government was of and for the people. The constitution provides that the powers of the government come from and is granted unto the various branches of government by the people.  The constitution does not provide rights to the people, it assumes they already have them and attempts to limit what powers the government will have in regulating society. The opening remarks in the constitution clearly state the reasons the document was constructed.  The government was created to be the common entity of the people to “establish justice, domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense and secure the blessings of Liberty for ourselves and our posterity. 
 

Liberty or freedom of the sovereign individual was a fundamental proclamation made clear by the authors of the constitution. Although the constitution clearly accepts the rights of the people to remain free, congress and the legislatures of the states voted for and ratified the Bill of Rights to more clearly identify the rights held by the people that the government had no right to infringe upon. 
 

For example: The second amendment clearly states that the “right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”.   “Infringe” means among other things: encroach on, intrude on, interfere with, impinge on, trespass or invade.  In other words, the people did not give the government the right to regulate arms in any way. No senator, congressman or judge thereof has the authority to infringe on the people’s right to bear arms of any size, nature or quantity.   
 

Therefore, the Bill supported by Senator Feinstein is unconstitutional on its face. It is not completely clear to me as to why the liberal left want to prevent the people from having arms of their choosing. Many of the very same people who want to take away or diminish my rights to own and carry weapons are themselves either owners and carriers or they have armed guards with them most or all of the time.  Is it ok for them to be protected but not the rest of us?
 

The constitution does not mention hunting as the reason for free people to keep and bear arms. The constitution is clear on the reason as, “being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.  It can’t be more clear. 
 

I recognized that there are crazy, even evil people out there who at times want to hurt others. That is precisely why my right to defend my family should never be infringed upon. One question often asked is: Why should anyone own an assault rifle? My answer: is because the bad guys already have them and any invading force whether domestic or foreign will have them.  Taking guns away from law bidding citizens is not the answer.