School: Americans Don’t Have Right to Bear Arms
Apr 9, 2013
The father of a Connecticut child is furious after discovering that his son’s school is teaching students that Americans don’t have a Second Amendment right to bear arms.
“I am appalled,” said Steven Boibeaux, of Bristol. “It sounds to me like they are trying to indoctrinate our kids.”
Boibeaux’s son is an eighth grader at Northeast Middle School. On Monday his social studies teacher gave students a worksheet titled, ‘The Second Amendment Today.’
“The courts have consistently determined that the Second Amendment does not ensure each individual the right to bear arms,” the worksheet states. “The courts have never found a law regulating the private ownership of weapons unconstitutional.
The worksheet, published by Instructional Fair, goes on to say that the Second Amendment is not incorporated against the states.
“This means that the rights of this amendment are not extended to the individual citizens of the states,” the worksheet reads. “So a person has no right to complain about a Second Amendment violation by state laws.”
According to the document, the Second Amendment “only provides the right of a state to keep an armed National Guard.”
- 7-YEAR OLD NABBED ON FELONY BB-GUN CHARGES
- FAMILY’S HOME RAIDED OVER FACEBOOK PHOTO OF CHILD’S RIFLE
- SCHOOL CONFISCATES CUPCAKES DECORATED WITH TOY SOLDIERS
- CHILD FACES SUSPENSION FOR MAKING LEGO GUN
Boibeaux said he discovered the worksheet as he was going over his son’s homework assignments.
“I’m more than a little upset about this,” he told Fox News. “It’s not up to the teacher to determine what the Constitution means.”
Mat Staver, the founder and chairman of the Liberty Counsel, called the lesson propaganda – that is “absolutely false.”
“In fact, the US Supreme Court has affirmed that the Second Amendment ensures the individual the right to bear arms,” Staver told Fox News. “The progressive interpretation of the Second Amendment is that it doesn’t give you the right to bear arms – that it’s a corporate right of the government – but that has been rejected by the Courts.”
Boibeaux’s son’s teacher also told the students that the Constitution is a “living document.”
As noted in the worksheet provided to students – that means “the interpretation changes to meet the needs of the times.”
“The judges and courts of each generation provide the interpretation of the document,” the worksheet states.
Boibeaux called that concept mind-boggling.
It’s not up to the teacher to determine what the Constitution means,” he said. “If you want to learn about the Constitution, recite it word for word.”
Staver said the idea that the Constitution is a living document is another progressive tactic.
“This idea that this school is propagating that the Constitution can simply be changed at the whim of someone – or that the Second Amendment does not protect the individual right to bear arms is absolute propaganda and absolutely false,” Staver said.
Boibeaux said he’s demanding meetings with the principal as well as the board of education.
“I just don’t appreciate this as a parent,” he said. “I expect teachers to teach my kids and tell the truth – not what they think their point of view is.”
Ellen Solek, the superintendent of the school district, told Fox News they have now decided to pull the assignment from the classroom.
“It is no longer an assignment in that particular school,” she said, noting that it was an “administration decision in the best interest of the district.”
She refused to answer any questions about the content of the lesson, how it became a part of the curriculum or how many students were assigned the lesson. She also refused to acknowledge whether the school will apologize to students and parents.
“No comment, thank you,” she said.
So the Government is saying that new background checks will keep your information secret. They LIE. Missouri had a law that only the Driver's license office would maintain information on concealed weapons permits. It was no to be shared with ANYONE. Well, the highway patrol request and received the information TWICE. WHich was immediately given to the Federal Government. Which was then run against private health records in violation of HIPAA.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your commit Live but should it be on another thread..lol... good to hear from you ..
DeleteAs I've said before, guns are not my issue. I support a background check, but the reality is that any provision created would allow so many loopholes it would negate the entire thing, just like the Brady Bill. Predictably, many of you here will respond with flag waving umbrage at anything to do with guns or religion. I'm not sure if you really believe these things are at the heart of freedom or not, but while we have kept our right to own guns and our right to denounce others in the name of a Christian God, we have lost real freedoms.
ReplyDeleteThe ongoing loss of freedoms due to the patriot act and the lack of concern about it from the right is very troubling, especially considering it was created by far right types. Equally disturbing, very few on the left have put any real check on it under Obama. When and if the day comes that our government decides to lock people down for good, those who own guns will be speed bumps to a military force that has tanks, helicopters, drones and the numbers to overwhelm any pathetic militia. Guns are not power and you do not have control over the government just because you own them. The only real power in democracy is the ability to vote and have your vote count. THAT is what is being taken away. Enjoy your guns
Maybe I'm naive, but I have a very hard time believing that the majority of a volunteer military force would blindly follow orders to turn on a large group of U.S. citizens. These people believe in freedom and the Constitution too.
ReplyDeleteThat said, I am somewhat amused that so many people are freaking out about the possibility that the Gubberment is gonna come take away their guns - a notion that NOBODY in any kind of position to do so is debating nor has even suggested.
To that point, what Max has posted is correct.
It's not our 2nd Amendment rights that are threatened. It's every other right guaranteed by our Constitution - freedom of speech, right to privacy, search & seizure, probable cause, etc. - that's under assault and has been for over a decade now.
But let's freak out over something that no one in government has even suggested. Whatever ...