Rittenhouse Verdict Posted on 11/24/2021 at 18:03:05 by John Wells
So two rioters died in the streets they were pillaging. Pity! Yet, it wasn’t murder. Whether the gun-control advocates like it or not, the 2nd Amendment provides the right to bear arms, including so-called “assault rifles.” To disagree is to ignore its pesky leading dependent clause: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,” indicates that this is precisely the nature of the amendment’s “arms” definition.
Perhaps modern society needs to change the Amendment, but the premise that gun-control laws are the vehicle to limit its presently guaranteed rights is Constitutionally wrong. In Washington’s Farewell Address he cautioned us about how change should come about in accordance with the Constitution’s provisions for change. Read it.
While Rittenhouse should not have been there, yet in the absence of police who should have stopped the rioting, he had every right to be there carrying a rifle. Poor judgment on his part did not detract from his rights. On the other hand, the police should have stopped the rioters who did not have any guarantee of safety while pillaging. It remains a pitiful abrogation of responsibility by all involved, most especially Government. Rittenhouse may not be a hero, but he acted in accordance of due process and had the charges dismissed by due process. Those who claim otherwise are foolishly misled.
