In the aftermath of the San Bernadino shootings, some leaders of this nation are again “up in arms” (pun intended) concerning gun control and how this country needs stricter gun laws in order to prevent more gun violence. In this article, I will attempt to debunk some of the lies that these leaders are attempting to sell in order to further their own agenda.
Whenever any politician sets out to restrict the American Citizens’ right to buy and own guns,he/she inevitably crashes against the wall of the 2nd Amendment (2A) and the words “shall not be infringed.” Recently, some of these politicians have resorted to name-calling of the 2A and calling for its repeal. However, a more dangerous tactic are those who seek to twist the language of this freedom giving amendment in order to mold it into the way they think the country should run.
The lies that these individuals weave concerning the 2A go like this:
1) The 2A only applies in the context of a well regulated militia, not private citizens.
2) The 2A is outdated and is no longer applicable as we have advanced as a country.
3) The 2A is to guarantee a means of hunting/recreation and therefore, “high
capacity” and “assault weapons” are not included in its protection.
I will consider each one of these in turn.
For your convenience, here is the full text of the 2A:
“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.”
1) The 2A only applies in the context of a well regulated militia, not private citizens. A lot of people, including some of our politicians, get thrown off by the wording of this Amendment. In doing so and making this claim, they miss the entire point of the Amendment itself! In my understanding, this Amendment secures, not just one, but TWO rights. The first being the right to a “well regulated militia”, and the second being the right of the “people to keep and bear arms.”
The 2A could not be clearer in its differentiation between the “militia” and the “people.” The founders, in light of recent events (the American Revolution), obviously felt that the government should NEVER have the right to tell the people they could not bear arms. Moreover, the founders felt so strongly that, along with the freedom to bear arms, they included the freedom to ORGANIZE (well regulated) into a militia in order to ensure the “security of a free State” should the need ever rise again. To claim that the right to bear arms only exists in the context of a “well-regulated militia” undermines the original intent of the Bill of Rights, which was to RESTRICT the power of the government. That context does not RESTRICT the government but EMPOWERS it since it would be up to the government to provide the regulation.
2) The 2A is outdated and is no longer applicable as we have advanced as a country. William Pitt (the Younger) once said, “Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.” Our government will stop at nothing to convince us that we have advanced as a culture and no longer NEED guns. They would claim that the best way to make our nation safe is to get rid of guns altogether. Are these the words of a government trying to protect its people from themselves, or a government trying to protect itself from it’s people? And if so, why does said government have the need to fear its people if it is governing properly? Evil will continue to exist
no matter how many laws and regulations a nation has, no matter how advanced the nation has become.
3) The 2A is to guarantee a means of hunting/recreation and therefore “high capacity” and “assault weapons” are not included in its protection. These are the politicians that claim we must understand the 2A culturally in the context of it’s time and realize that the Founders were obviously thinking of muskets and the like when they placed this freedom in the Constitution. Do not get me wrong, once the first person can point and show me the word “muskets’ in the 2A, I will completely denounce my stance and turn my weapons in. The framers of our Constitution knew they were drafting a document for ages to come, and intentionally left certain things vague, such as the word arms.
Our young nation had just come through a Revolution in which they had won they’re freedom from a tyrannical government. Our Founding Fathers knew that the people needed the right and ability to defend themselves from any similar government that may come in the future. What sense, I ask you, would it make for “we the people” today to attempt to fight off a tyrannical state using muskets? The thought is absolutely absurd! Yet, this is what they would have you believe. Our government would have us keep our single shot rifles, shotguns, and pistols for “hunting/recreational” purposes knowing that they outgun us to the MAX. However, our “high capacity” and “assault weapons” are “killing instruments” and are not meant to be in the hands of the “people” and not secured under the 2A. Let your “friendly” government handle those. If the government is in need of such “killing instruments,” then the people are in need of protection from such “killing instruments.” The old saying goes, you fight fire with fire. We the people can’t fight automatic rifles with muskets.
Education is the key to keeping, defending, and winning back our rights. Do not believe lies and do not be sold short. Let the words “shall not be infringed” be our continual battle cry against these politicians who would seek to disarm us. It is your right!
It is your FREEDOM!
SCCarry: Aiken County Leader