Americans prevent 'brainwashing' by learning about Second Amendment rights

My name is Brenda Lenard and I intend to be the next United States Senator from Tennessee.
I grew up in the projects of Atlanta. Some folks would even say I grew up without hope.  But they’re wrong. 

If you saw the hit movie, The Blind Side, then you have an inkling of what my early life was like. The projects were awful; crime was rampant; and food was scarce and completing a good education was difficult. Poverty. No hope. Some said that was my future, but they were mistaken.

I am now completing my Ph.D. at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville and am a Senate candidate for the state of Tennessee. Please feel free to visit my website at; Facebook at Brenda Lenard 2012; follow me on Twitter at Brenda4Freedom.

Though Attorney General Eric Holder is considered the arbiter for justice in America, his statement  in a 1995 C-Span interview that he wants people, “Brainwashed against guns”  is quite the opposite. Suggestions such as brainwashing people against the Second Amendment are, in many regards, circumventing the Constitution. Holder, along with other opponents of the Second Amendment,  want to  circumvent the Constitution by  “interpreting” the amendment away, or simply ignoring it as “irrelevant” eighteenth-century metaphysics. 

Holder’s brainwashing suggestion is in line with other anti-Constitution individuals such as  Rexford G. Tugwell, ex-New Deal planner who interprets the Second Amendment  to read as: “No person shall bear arms or possess lethal weapons except police, members of the armed forces, or those licensed under law according to rules established by the Court of Rights and Duties.”

These statements and activities transcends the boundaries of a free society the right to keep and bear arms. Specifically, the Second Amendment to the Constitution reads, “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.”

An individual’s right to bear arms is not a new American phenomenon. Rather, an individual’s right to self defense is rooted in Greek, Roman, and Slavic law that states a man who caught an intruder in his house by day, should seize him and hold him for authorities; if the intruder came at night, he could kill him. In other words, as James Otis indicated, “home is a man’s castle!”

Moreover, the seventh item in the English Bill of Rights of 1689 is further ancestral support for individual gun rights and says: “That the subjects which are Protestants may have arms for their defence suitable to their conditions, and as allowed by law.”

Lastly, the meaning of the Second Amendment is comparable to provisions in eighteenth-century and nineteenth-century state bills of rights. For example,  the Texas Constitution of 1876 states that: “Every citizen shall have the right to keep and bear arms in the lawful defense of himself or the State; but the Legislature shall have power, by law, to regulate the wearing of arms, with a view to prevent crime.” These examples of our Constitution as well as historical antecedent evidence indicate that an individual right of self-defense exists alongside but separate from from any militia issues.

Opponents disregard statements of rights in the Bill of Rights as suggestions that are at the discretion of government officials to decide how to realign them to a liberal ideology. The Founders words, “the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed,”  is not followed by qualifications such as  “unless presenting a clear and present danger,” “except to the extent inconsistent with public safety,” or “unless outweighed by a compelling state interest.” However, as Law professor William Van Alstyne puts it, “the Second Amendment is not ‘mysterious;’ rather today it is simply unwelcome.” As for those who dislike it, it is for them to seek a repeal, override, or in the case of Holder, to simply “brainwash” individuals against guns.

Our government education has done a masterful job of not teaching students about the founding of our Republic or Western Ideas rich in tradition and history. As a result, individuals such as Holder take a different approach to teaching students about the Constitution – brainwash them! 

I summary, I agree with Holder that we should brainwash individuals; but not against guns, rather for the Second Amendment specifically and the Constitution in general, because what is ultimately at stake is the ever erosion of freedom! Although the Second Amendment may seem to only be a concern for a small group of hunters, collectors and gun enthusiasts, it should be a matter of concern for anyone who cares about the freedoms and liberties that are being eroded by the overreach of government one brainwash attempt at a time!