EDITORIAL

The Conundrum of the Fourth Estate -

Why I need an AR-15

David A. Lombardo

This isn't what Edmund Burke had in mind when he used the term "Fourth Estate" during a debate in the House of Commons of Great Britain. It marked the lifting of a ban on press coverage of the British Parliament in 1787. Burke referred to the press as the Fourth Estate; the first three, being the clergy, the nobility and, from a ruling perspective in dead last place - the commoners. It was a landmark decision, letting the press cover Britain's political inner sanctum, because the press was looking out for the commoners; the little guys; John Q. Citizen.

With a tip of the hat to Burke, today's interpretation of the three estates is: Legislative, judicial and executive, i.e. the congress, the courts and the president. Unlike Burke's time, today's Fourth Estate is, for the most part, in the bag for The Messiah.

But that little fact notwithstanding, it's not one whit better if they're in the bag for the guys that turn right when they go to their seats in Congress. The press should be neutral. You know, looking out for the commoners; the little guys; John Q. Citizen.

Now I know my red meat eating friends are thinking, "What the hell does this have to do with my AR-15." Well, that's where it gets interesting. Thomas Jefferson said, "I consider trial by jury as the only anchor ever yet imagined by man, by which a government can be held to the principles of its constitution."

You see, Jefferson was a Federalist and he believed that a jury, though not technically a Fourth Branch of government, limited the power of the three branches. And who is the jury? With apologies to Pogo, "I have met the jury and he is us."

With the failure of the press to report the truth, warts and all, and be nothing more than a propaganda machine for one party or another, we the people must rightfully assume our role as the Fourth Estate.

The gun-grabbers have given up saying the Second Amendment isn't a right of the people or they don't want to take away hunting rifles. They've taken a new tack and in the traditions of Saul Alinsky are now chanting it is the people's right to own a firearm for personal protection. Bah, humbug.

Okay, my red meat eating compadres, here it comes. The purpose of the Second Amendment is for the common man to be able to prevent being shackled by the other three estates. It guarantees that common men, who far outnumber the politicians and judges, have the ability to prevent oppression even by force, if necessary.

Do I think that's likely to happen? No, I don't but here's the rub; the government has the institutions of the military and law enforcement on their side; if not every member therein. And what is the weapon of choice for the military and law enforcement: The fully automatic M-16. It is not coincidental that no Army in history has ever gone into combat with handguns. No revolver, no semi-auto pistol, no hunting rifle or shotgun is a match for an M-16 and while our AR-15s may only be semi-auto, we so far outnumber those institutions that it renders it a moot point.