It Took An Uprising In Venezuela To Teach MSNBC This Lesson About Our Constitution

By streiff | 10:00 PM on April 30, 2019

The opinions expressed by contributors are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of RedState.com.

*Screengrab from https://twitter.com/NewYork_SPIN/status/1123393663659331584*

Much like the was Hitler and Stalin operated, Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez, who is now roasting on an anal spit in the darkest, hottest reaches of Hell, consolidated his rule by disarming the Venezuelan people. In 2012, he decreed that private ownership of firearms to be illegal.

Today, Venezuelans of all remaining social classes were out in the streets demanding that the illegitimate thug Nicolas Maduro leave and that the man recognized as head of state by most of the world, Juan Guaido, be allowed to assume control of the country. Unfortunately, there is an mismatch of power:

https://twitter.com/NewYork_SPIN/status/1123393663659331584

All of this led MSNBC reporter Kerry Sanders to make a point that will probably cost him his job:

MSNBC reporter Kerry Sanders accidentally makes a strong case for the Second Amendment while talking about Venezuela: “In Venezuela, gun ownership is not something that is open to everybody. So if the military have the guns, they have the power.”pic.twitter.com/QyY1x9EgXt

— Ryan Saavedra (@RealSaavedra) April 30, 2019

If this sounds familiar, it is because those of us who believe in the Second Amendment have been saying for years. The Second Amendment has zero to do with target shooting or hunting. It is there to protect the nation from invasion and insurrection and to protect the citizenry from a tyrannical government at local, state, or federal level. During the ratification debate, a prominent Pennsylvanian and member of the Congress under the Articles of Confederation named Tench Coxe had this to say:

The power of the sword, say the minority of Pennsylvania, is in the hands of Congress. My friends and countrymen, it is not so, for THE POWERS OF THE SWORD ARE IN THE HANDS OF THE YEOMANRY OF AMERICA FROM SIXTEEN TO SIXTY. The militia of these free commonwealths, entitled and accustomed to their arms, when compared with any possible army, must be tremendous and irresistible. Who are the militia? are they not ourselves. Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American. What clause in the state or federal constitution hath given away that important right . . . . The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.”

If Venezuelans had had the right to keep and bear arms, neither Chavez nor Maduro could have succeeded. That is the lesson we all need to take away from whatever happens in that unfortunate country. Without firearms, you don’t have rights, you have privileges that men with guns let you exercise so long as you don’t become inconvenient.