Politicians in Hawaii Call for REPEAL of Second Amendment

P. Gardner Goldsmith | March 11, 2019
Font Size

Take a wild guess…

To which of the wonderful political parties do these Hawaii state politicians that don't like the Second Amendment as it stands belong?

Yeah, you got it. They’re all Democrats.

Christian Gomez reports for The New American that five Hawaii state senators have introduced resolutions to call on the US Congress to either repeal the Second Amendment or revise it.

Democratic legislators have introduced two virtually identical resolutions in the Hawaii Senate urging Congress to consider a constitutional amendment to either repeal or clarify the Second Amendment… State Senators Stanley Chang (D-9), Karl Rhoads (D-13), Rosalyn Baker (D-6), Dru Kanuha (D-3), and Laura Thielen (D-25) introduced both Senate Resolution 29 and Senate Concurrent Resolution 42.

But… But… Why would they want to do that if the Second Amendment was, as leftists repeatedly argue, a “group right” belonging only to cops and members of the US government’s military and not to individual people (which is the philosophical and logical basis of a right)? Why would they want to “revise” it if the Second Amendment already allows for political attenuation of rights, as they’ve repeatedly and erroneously argued?

How strange… It turns out they don’t like the fact that Anonin Scalia and the majority on the SCOTUS found in “DC v Heller” (2008) that the Second Amendment clearly sees the right to be an individual one, which only makes sense, because there is no such thing as a “group right”. The word “group” is merely a term applied to an assemblage of individuals, and it never takes on any other “identity” than that. It is always reducible to the individuals therein, and, by their nature, they always retain their rights in the face of the state. And Scalia’s decision wasn’t even something libertarians and conservatives should applaud, for, although he and the majority ruled that the Second Amendment protects the individual right, he hedged at the end, undercutting the very concept of rights by saying that rights can be attenuated by government.

That, of course, runs counter to the very definition of rights.

Regardless, this seems to have infuriated the Fab Five in Hawaii, for, as Gomez notes, they included this highfalutin expression of their discontent…

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the United States Congress is requested to consider and discuss whether the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution should be repealed or amended to clarify that the right to bear arms is a collective, rather than individual, constitutional right.

There is no such thing as a collective right, Senators.

This is not only provable based on a reading of the word “right” and its origin in medieval England and Germany, it is logically correct. We are individuals, autonomous. Humans act according to praxeological primacy, meaning; each of us acts through individual choice. Even when forming a “collective” as you call it, Senators, two or more people are acting individually, through their own individual volition. They retain their rights and can attenuate them based on their voluntary agreement.

This kind of voluntary collective is not really a “collective” as you see it. It is just a group of individuals choosing to work together based on agreements each of them has reached. Within it, each of them still retains his right to exercise his or her inherent rights based on his voluntary agreement.

Senators, your idea of a political collective is involuntary. It is forced. It is the forced subjugation of the individual to the will of the majority or the politically powerful minority. Your “collective” cannot have rights, because it subsumes any possibility of individual choice and individual identity.

To think that adults can spout such nonsense is almost beyond belief. Yet they have, and they are calling for a Constitutional Convention to implement their proposal.

Gomez notes that this is not something new:

In fact, Hawaii lawmakers have already suggested a convention to propose, among one of its aims, an amendment to do just that. In 2012, liberal Democratic state legislators introduced House Concurrent Resolution 114, a radical leftist Con-Con application that sought to repeal the Second Amendment, declare ObamaCare to be constitutional, and to abolish the Electoral College.

The kids haven’t grown up.

How sad. To not just not comprehend the fundamental basis of human society -- that being the respect for the rights of the individual – but to expose this utter lack of comprehension to the world, repeatedly.

A lesson to us watching them. Teach people the meaning of rights and the importance of individualism. Otherwise, nonsense of the kind displayed by the Furious Five will continue, and put our own rights at risk.