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.
This 2nd Amendment to the US Constitution, like many others, has been abridged to a title so often that most people are completely unaware of what it says and as such the ambiguity of its meaning. The words that were ratified underwent scrutiny so as to keep from absolutes being attributed to their utterance and their characterization to be adopted to a cause for which the words and laws were never intended.
At the time of the Revolution and the period just beyond, the fragile American Democracy had large lands and sea port access from foreign powers intent on depriving us of the free nation for which the forefathers fought so hard. Additionally, although the Continental Congress created the American Army in 1775, the slowness of communication and the size of the growing nation meant that in order to defend the “home front” we would have to employ the use of Militia, or non professional soldiers called upon in times of need and at that time there were many times of need particularly since the war wasn’t won until far after the Declaration of Independence in 1776.
Additionally, the weapons of war and the weapons used for hunting and defending the homestead were the same. They were muskets with single shot capability. While the British certainly had access to artillery, the home was not so equipped. There seemed to be a definite difference between these weapons. The right to keep and bear arms, meaning to have them in your homes and carry them around was necessary to perform the function of the Militia.
Today, the term Militia is used quite differently. We have a secure nation, organized armed forces and have seen the peaceful transition of power over and over again. We don’t need a Militia force to maintain a free nation. In 1791, we did.
Today, we have weapons being carried by individuals who would object to being called up into a militia in defense of our country that can kill hundreds of people in a matter of minutes. Why? I believe one reason. Commerce. That’s right…the almighty dollar.
Private companies that should be manufacturing weapons of war for war are actively engaged in fanning the flames of the misinterpretation of this “right” to line their own pockets. The more that people, ordinary citizens, have access to weapons of war, the greater the degree of lawlessness and the greater the degree that we will see the increase of these attacks.
The solution? Immediately make it illegal to own or bear arms classified as a weapon of war. That should include every weapon capable of automatic firing. This would not include weapons with revolutionary war capabilities for when the “right” was given…but no bombs, grenades, tanks, oh wait…they are already illegal. Duh!
Existing guns in the hands of the public should be bought back by the government or allowed to remain owned by the individual but managed by a licensed firing range at government cost for a period of 1 year. After a year, the owner is responsible for the payment of the safe and secure storage at the firing range. The gun will only be fired at the range.
Before you get your panties or briefs or boxers in a twist…I know that this won’t be easy. The argument that the individual is allowed to protect their house by virtue of this amendment, I have already explained that. Oh, and you can continue to use your hunting rifle and handgun provided it is not automated in any way.
Oh and ignore that bullshit about the fact that when you give up your guns you give up your freedom. That is propaganda spun by foreign powers who want to see us implode on our own. Ignore fake news like that…and while I’m at it…legitimate news should stop legitimizing these shootings by using words like “worst shooting” in their headlines and then running reports about it all day.
That’s my opinion. That’s my platform. If you don’t think that there are current politicians (ehem leaders?) who would be willing to do this…then nominate me. I’ll get it going.
One thought on “The Second Amendment and Weapons of War”