The 2nd Amendment… The most irrelevant factor in gun violence today.
Gideon D. Asche
Let me preface this with the fact that I personally oppose any and all federal gun control –That being said, I have also educated myself as to how and why we ended up with the right to bear arms, the scope of that right, and the limitations James Madison built in to our Bill of Rights – Something I would encourage you to do.
I have a couple of people I like to debate certain issues with. I chose them simply because they have opposite views, and have enough smarts to present a valid point – ergo I can learn something.
My friend Shelly is one of them; she is anti-gun as they come; I’m a rabid constitutionalist and supporter of the 2nd Amendment.
So, which of us is right?
My credentials are extensive, giving me the obvious edge on credibility, but let’s compare, just so you know who is who. I am an over 60 yr old, seasoned combat soldier, a paratrooper, qualified FF parachutist, I swore to defend and uphold this constitution with my life, I was part of the Nuclear PRP and held a TSC most of my career, I spent years serving my country overseas, I am multilingual, and spent a decade, although 30 years ago, in the field as a HUMINT operator. I am competent with both firearms and explosives.
Pretty damn Impressive huh… so let’s look at hers.
She is a former Army officer, a combat soldier (likely more combat time than I have), also swore to uphold and defend this constitution with her life, she’s a mother, a wife married to another combat soldier, she is well educated, competent and experienced with weapons, has plenty of field experienced… probably has a TSCC or higher, and has several years of current real-world experience… Damn… that didn’t turn out exactly as I wanted it to. Howsabout we just forgo the qualifications part and move on to the 2nd Amendment, and which of us is right. – Did I mention she is a girl?
Our discussions usually end up with her making a comment and me responding with: ”the 2nd is unalterable and sacred,”
She says “There should be background checks,” – I say “Infringement.” She says “No one needs an AK-47” – I say ” where does the 2nd stipulate need – Infringement.” She says “You need to be in a militia” – I point out the purpose of a comma in English, say “Infringement.” and ask if she also believes “Freedom of speech” only applies to those in a religion and gathering together in public while they speak, or do the commas only not count in the 2nd?
She says “Gun safety training should be required,” I say “Infringement”… but I’m thinking about years ago, training soldiers who had never held a gun before. – Hmmm… maybe she has a point.
She says – “Mentally ill people shouldn’t have guns”…. I say “Infrin…” Well, wait a min… maybe the insane shouldn’t have guns.
She says “Background checks,” and I say “infringement” … but I’m thinking; “maybe background checks might be a good idea,” ya know, just cause of the mentally ill thing… my legal mind immediately says … “Infringement.”
But is it? – Maybe Not.
There are two absolutes about the right to bear arms:
- Madison intended for the individual right to bear arms to have no possibility of Federal infringement or limitation on type or number of weapons; and
- Madison never intended there to be a free for all with no means of regulation.
The intent of the 2nd is not in question, except by those who wish it said something different. Unfortunately, both ends of the spectrum wield it like a hunter’s club on a helpless seal pup. – I blame it on the U.S. education system.
Think about it a moment, forget the emotion that has your hackles up and consider how completely irrelevant the 2nd Amendment is to the gun violence issue – there is no connection, there is no reason to even discuss it.
Stop wasting your effort.
So, what is the solution? – The Constitution for the United States is the solution.
No one in their right mind thinks it would be a good idea for me to own a live MLRS “Six-Pak,” especially the “Alt-Right, White is Right” compound down country from me, they’re within range.
Yet, I can legally buy one and install it on the hill behind the house.
I’ve submitted to all the theatrics and jumped through all the hoops for my FFL and, under federal law, I can legally own any weapon (nukes included) that I can afford to buy and pay the tax stamp – The only limitation is my wallet.
At least 3 of you just turned white at the thought of me owning a rocket launcher huh… Relax, Madison knew a bit about human nature, and he made sure there was a means of gun regulation .
Just not a Federal means of regulation. He didn’t trust the feds any more than you or I do. The state of California has laws that clearly prohibit me from owning a rocket launcher, simply based on my inability to safely maintain or use it. But – hold on… that’s infringement – a clear violation of the 2nd.
WRONG! – There is s no violation of the 2nd for a city or state to outlaw any or all guns.
Wyatt Earp was the first one who used the 10th to cut down the number of gunfights so common in tombstone. Visitors were required to give up their sidearms as they entered town.
The last of Madison’s amendments codified as part of the bill of rights was his 12th it became the 10th and in my mind, the most important amendment of all.
The 10th simply states that if the authority is not specifically given to the feds by constitutional law – then they have no authority and that authority falls to the States, and ultimately to the people.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. Amendment X Constitution for the United States, 1789.
The emotional nature of shooting up a school clouds judgment and the weeks after a shooting are always chaos with a big let down of no action when it’s over. Coherent discussion tends to be replaced with one side mooing about a militia and the other offering up their guns 180 grains at a time, neither has any interest in compromise.
The anti-gun movement expends unmeasurable effort to accomplish nothing, and the NRA laughs and produces “Hitler loves gun control” memes for their followers. The Hitler gun control memes always give me a chuckle.
FACT: Hitler never used gun control or seized guns, he rescinded all gun control in his first year and never enacted anything that could be misconstrued as gun control in the 18 years he held elected office.
The next time someone compares your gun control views with Hitler, point out that NAZI Germany had the most liberal gun laws in modern history. The fact is Tyrants never bother with gun control. It is more productive to tyranny to use propaganda to gain control of the church and the sections of society who have the majority of the guns.
Gun control only raises its ugly head when things are good in a society.
At some point in the history of every civilization, life becomes more than just survival and, as things get better, society as a whole begins to care (at least on the surface) about each other. Social programs are implemented, and law enforcement as a means of protecting the people begins.
Eventually, there is an effort to curb crime by eliminating the tools of crime – it only makes sense, and this has always included some sort of weapons restrictions. Go back as far as first century Sicarii and the story never changes right up to today.
Gun control is just a byproduct of civilization, much like syphilis, beer or organized crime. It really doesn’t hurt anyone, and it isn’t taken seriously by those in power.
Madison penned his original 17 amendments, (12 of which were presented to Congress) as a guarantee that we as a people would never again be subjected to tyranny. The Second is our guarantee that we will never be outgunned by our own government again.
Is that a “Pie in the Sky” idea? Sure, it is, but it’s one of the foundational rights and trying to alter it will result in revolution. Personally, I consider the 2nd one of the least important of the big 10, but that is another article.
Madison never meant there to be chaos or for anyone unfit mentally or criminally to have unfettered access to guns. He never intended for any of the rights to infringe on the rights of any other American.
He specifically delegated the authority to regulate everything he didn’t trust the feds with, to the States or the people. (10th amendment) Just like shooting up a school and murder are state crimes; gun control is a 100% state issue.
When my state voted to ban 30 round mags and require a bullet button instead of a quick-change mag, I bitched and moaned, but even a rabid constitutionalist like me can’t come up with any constitutional reason to resist.
The authority rests with our state legislators, our individual communities, and the people. If you want common sense gun laws – You can have them… but you need to apply common sense … and you don’t need to violate my rights or even consider the 2nd to do it. If one of your children breaks an arm – do you call your yard guy?
If your house is on fire – do you call animal control?
Because you have enough sense to go to the doctor… or call the Fired dept. So why waste time mooing at Congress, who can’t do diddly and will always run into a Constitutional brick wall.
My point and message to my anti-gun friends is simple: If you want common sense gun control that I can’t summarily destroy in a courtroom by simply applying the constitution? —Go to your state legislature and enact it.
I can guarantee that if it were 40 states and not just four that enacted gun control, it would be national in no time at all. – it would piss me off to no end, but I’m a constitutionalist – I accept constitutional laws.
When was the last time you addressed gun control or gun violence with someone who could help?
Maybe if the effort was focused it would somehow become effective, – the anti-gun movement has proven to be little more than entertainment for the NRA.