The Sword and Sovereignty CD Book

For a more in-depth understanding of the constitutional and pre-constitutional homeland security history, click here to buy The Sword and Sovereignty: The Constitutional Principles of “the Militia of the Several States” (Constitutional Homeland Security) [CD-ROM]

swordandsovereignty-300x300

Book Description

Publication Date: 2012
The Sword and Sovereignty: The Constitutional Principles of “the Militia of the several States” is a comprehensive study-2,304 pages in length, with 6,544 footnotes and endnotes-of the constitutional and statutory history of America’s Militia, which gives special emphasis to the unique and indispensable rôle of the Militia as the institutions through which WE THE PEOPLE themselves ultimately provide, or withhold, “the consent of the governed” upon which this country’s form of government depends for its legitimacy. The Sword and Sovereignty derives the basic legal and practical principles of the Militia from a detailed study of the pre-constitutional Militia statutes of Rhode Island and Virginia (selected, for reasons the book makes clear, as exemplars of what happened throughout America in that era). It explains how these principles are embodied in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, and how they should be applied in the operation of America’s true “federal” system of government-indeed, why it is Congress’s and every State’s duty to see to the organization of, and every American’s personal duty to participate in, the Militia, more imperatively now than ever before. It exposes the dangerous fallacy in the contemporary “individual-rights” misinterpretation of the Second Amendment, and explains how the Supreme Court’s Heller decision reduced Americans’ “right * * * to keep and bear Arms” to a level far below what their forebears enjoyed when the Constitution and Bill of Rights were ratified. And it examines ways in which revitalized “Militia of the several States” could, should, and if they were properly revitalized would deal with many of the most pressing contemporary problems this country faces-such as the correction of rogue public officials; the supervision of the “the military-industrial complex”; the conduct of honest elections; the provision of an alternative currency, etc.
Here in Dr. Vieira’s own words is a description of the book and its relevance, taken from an interview on February 10, 2013 with Anthony Wile of the Daily Bell.

Edwin Vieira

Dr. Edwin Vieira, Jr.

The Daily Bell is pleased to present this exclusive interview with Edwin Vieira, Jr. The entire interview is available here:

http://www.thedailybell.com/bellinclude.cfm?id=28672&bid=0&StartRow=41&PageNum=3#FeedBackStart

Dr. Vieira: The Sword and Sovereignty is available at Amazon.com. It is a study of the actual constitutional “right of the people to keep and bear Arms” in the Second Amendment in its inextricable relation to “the Militia of the several States,” as opposed to the historically inaccurate and legally indefensible so-called “individual right to keep and bear arms” on which almost all contemporary advocates of the Second Amendment fixate. I describe “the individual right to keep and bear arms” as legally indefensible because fundamentally it is a right in name only, inasmuch as it lacks an effective remedy if an highly organized and armed tyranny sets out to suppress it, whereas the true “right of the people to keep and bear Arms” exercised in the context of “well regulated Militia” is the Constitution’s own preferred remedy against usurpation and tyranny in their every aspect. Even though the Second Amendment is very much the subject of contemporary political debate, I seem to be one of the very few commentators saying as much − which, in these days of rampant legal and political confusion, misinformation and disinformation, is probably very convincing evidence that I am correct.

In any event, The Sword and Sovereignty breaks down into four parts: First, an analysis of the correct manner of interpreting the Constitution. Second, an application of the rules of constitutional interpretation to the question of “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms” in relation to “the Militia of the several States,” elucidating the basic principles of the Militia through a thoroughgoing analysis of the pre-constitutional Militia statutes of the Colonies and independent States. Third, an application of the principles of the Militia, and especially of the duty (as well as the right) of all eligible Americans to be armed, to present-day problems of what is called “homeland security.” And fourth, a warning that, should these principles not be applied in the very near future − immediately, if not sooner, as I like to put it − America will slip under the control of a national para-militarized police-state apparatus (which anyone with even the least insight should recognize is taking place at an ever-accelerating pace even as he reads these words). The book is heavily freighted with footnotes and endnotes identifying primary sources, so no one has to take my poor word alone for its premises and conclusions. . .

The Sword and Sovereignty was first made available in mid-December of 2012. It had to be put out on a CD in PDF format because there was insufficient interest shown among potential readers to justify producing a quality hardbound printed version (although that may become an option in the future). In light of the popularity of the subject matter of the book − the Second Amendment and related constitutional issues − that depth of disinterest really surprised me. But now, with all of the brouhaha over new, draconian “gun-control” legislation in the States as well as in Congress, the very slow sale of, and dearth of commentary about, the CD is more than surprising. It is shocking, even appalling. Especially so when more and more commentators, bloggers, and others on the Internet are recognizing, and correctly so, that the ultimate purpose of the Second Amendment is not to protect hunters or target shooters, or even to enable individuals to protect themselves against common criminals but instead to enable common Americans to resist the political crimes of usurpation and tyranny. Which, I believe, the historical record proves beyond peradventure cannot be accomplished through the exercise of an “individual right to keep and bear arms,” but rather demands collective action through “the Militia of the several States.” . . .

There are far too many (fundamental conclusions) to compile here. The five most consequential for the average man’s understanding of the present-day issue of “gun control” are that: (i) The maintenance of freedom depends inextricably upon the American people’s collective participation in “well regulated Militia,” not upon individual action; (ii) “A well regulated Militia” is composed of nearly all of the eligible adult residents in a State, who are required by law to serve; (iii) Every member of such a Militia (other than conscientious objectors) must be armed with one or more firearms, ammunition and accoutrements suitable for Militia service, all of which must always be maintained in his personal possession; (iv) Because two of the most important responsibilities of the Militia are to repel invasions by foreign countries and to put down domestic usurpation and tyranny by rogue public officials, every armed member of the Militia must be equipped with a firearm suitable for those specific purposes − which means a firearm equivalent to, if not better than, the firearms contemporary regular armed forces bear: that is, not just a semi-automatic, magazine-fed rifle in 5.56 x 45 (.223) or 7.62 x 39 caliber, but a fully automatic or burst-fire rifle, preferable in a caliber moreeffective than the latter calibers, such as 6.5 x 38 Grendel (which can be made to work reliably on an AR-15 or M-16 platform); and (v) because “the Militia of the several States” are State governmental institutions, no contemporary form of “gun control” can be applied to them or their members by either Congress or the States’ legislatures. Rather, it is the duty of Congress and the States’ legislatures to see that all members of the Militia are properly armed, not to any degree disarmed. That is, as to the Militia and their members (which includes essentially all adult Americans), allforms of contemporary “gun control,” including those of the Feinstein and Cuomo patterns (to name two of the more infamous poster-children for “gun control”), are absolutely unconstitutional.