Broadcast journalist Ben Swann took on gun control and the Second Amendment, exposing some “hard truths” that liberals won’t like.
In his “Reality Check” segment, Swann dug into the roots of our right to bear arms, and the intent of our founding fathers when they ensconced that into our Constitution.
In 2012, in the wake of the Newtown tragedy, CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin wrote an article in The New Yorker titled “So you think you know the Second Amendment?” In that piece, Toobin argued that the Constitution intended to protect a militia controlled by the state, and that an individual right to bear arms was cooked up by Reagan Republicans and the NRA in the 1980s.
Swann went back to the Constitution’s framers to destroy Toobin’s analysis. “What is a well regulated militia? What were the framers talking about really? Of all the fears of the founding fathers, none was stronger than their fear of standing armies.”
This may be a very foreign concept, but the first fight over the Second Amendment wasn’t over whether the population should be armed. All the framers agreed with that. The fight was between federalists and anti-federalists over whether we would have a standing army.
In short, the federalists—including men like John Jay, James Madison and George Washington—wanted the Second Amendment because they believed a strong federal government would be able to control a standing army.
And the anti-federalists wanted it because it would mean every able-bodied man in America would be armed in the event that the federal government or America’s own standing army turned on its own people.
The hard truth that liberals won’t like is this: “The Second Amendment is not about hunting, or even just defense of your own home,” Swann said. “It was written by men who ultimately believed that governments and armies would turn on their own people.”
Watch the video below.