LibertyMaryland

The Second Amendment

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” — Second Amendment of the United States Constitution

This to me is a very simply explained concept and well written amendment.

In order to secure liberty it could be necessary for the people to defend it with arms from an enemy, foreign or domestic. In addition to the security realities of the day, I believe that the intent of the founders was to create the ultimate of the many checks and balances in the Constitution via this amendment.

There are of course many reasons for a free person to desire to own a firearm. Hunting is the cherished past time of many regions and families. Marksmanship is a sport of Olympic stature. Great enjoyment is found by those who collect and care for firearms. Of course protection of one’s home and the safety of one’s family is of paramount concern to many gun owners. All of the issues I listed are enough to convince me that our Constitution’s position on arms is correct. Free people, in the exercise of their liberty, should be able to do any activity so long as that activity does not conflict with another person’s exercise of their own liberty.

However, what is actually the substantive point of this issue and this cherished amendment, is that by allowing the citizens to remain armed this preserves their right to give consent to be governed. Without the clearly defined rights in the Second Amendment, the people lose the ability to rebel and therefore lose their ability to consent to be governed. Reductions of the strength of the Second Amendment via legislation is contrary to the revolutionary spirit of our nation’s founding. I feel those who signed the Declaration of Independence would look on with scorn at those who attempt to cheapen the significance of these concerns.

I am anxious to read the Supreme Court’s opinion in District of Columbia vs. Heller. Regardless of that opinion and its affect on the regulations of the states, I will not vote for any additional Federal regulation of firearms if elected to Congress and will work to rescind the majority of those on the books.

- Richard Matthews

Originally posted February 8th, 2008

Republican Matthews calls for troops to come home in 2009

Baltimore, MD – Republican candidate for Congress Richard Matthews calls for a safe and swift withdraw of U.S. Forces stationed in the Middle East in 2009. Matthews states as a campaign promise, “If I gain the trust of the voters of Maryland to serve in 2009, I will not vote for any bill that extends the presence of the U.S. military in Iraq. Any bill that includes spending for the continuation of U.S. military operations in Iraq, I will commit myself to vote against.”

Candidate Matthews thinks that the mission(s) in Iraq have been accomplished. “We have verified that there are no weapons that are threatening the security of the United States, we have toppled a dictator, and now is the time for us to step out of the way and let Iraq become a sovereign, independent nation.”

The Matthews campaign feels that the Democratic incumbent in Maryland’s Second District C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger can be commended for voting against the “surge” in Iraq in early 2007. However, his stated position of a “Perimeter Plan” does not help protect the security of the United States. Continue reading Republican Matthews calls for troops to come home in 2009…

Babbula endorses James in MD 4 CD

Today the Peter James’ Congressional campaign in Maryland’s 4th district received the endorsement of Micheal Babbula the 3rd place finisher in the CD 4 democratic race.

I gave a talk and showed the “Money as Debt” video to Dr. Babbula’s economics class tonight.

In Liberty,

Peter

First Post

This is our first post. Stay tuned…