Tuesday, April 28, 2009

Some Thoughts on the 2nd Amendment

In studying the 2nd Amendment and the history behind it, I as a pro-gun advocate have noticed several things, most of these have already been expounded upon in detail by other’s that support gun rights. I will merely mention them here as a background for this piece. The first one being that the people of the 2nd Amendment are the same people as are referred to under the 1st, 4th, 5th, 9th, and 10th Amendments. Each of these other amendments have been upheld by courts to apply to individual citizens. That means the 2nd Amendment is not solely for the arming of an army and/or National Guard force(s).

Secondly the Constitution was written in plain English (for the day) and would have been meant to have been easily understood by the vast majority of colonists to whom it would have applied. In fact the Constitution was not only circulated to large cities, but also to smaller hamlets/towns/settlements so that the colonists could read (or have it read) and discuss whether to approve it or not. Let us also not forget that at this point and time a sizeable portion of the population had at least one firearm in their homes to supply food, and aid in the town/settlements defense (remember, Indian attacks were very common at this time). Hunting at this time was not a “sport”, but rather a way of survival for a large part of the population.

From here you should have gotten the general idea, but I have one other point that is very rarely mentioned, or even brought up. We have all heard by now about the militia of the day and how each and every able bodied man was expected to take parts in the routine drills/exercises enough to be familiar with how a group of men fought as a group (at least in the military philosophies of the day). Each man was expected to provide his own weapon, but if he could not then one would be supplied for him.

Here is where things start to get interesting. What type of weapon do you think those that could supply their own brought along, a smooth-bore musket or a rifle? The vast majority showed up to these exercises with rifles, because the smooth-bore musket was not practical for everyday colonial life. The smooth-bore was the choice of the military because with large amounts of troops it was easier to reload and fire volleys than was the rifle. However, it was severely inaccurate as compared to the rifle. Hence a case could be made that the rifle in a way was far superior to the smooth-bore that was in common military usage. Therefore the founders by their wording of the 2nd Amendment intended for the people to be able to arm themselves with firearms superior to those of the modern military, at least as far as accuracy is concerned.

Quote for the Day

"When the federal government is more concerned with militias than street gangs, then you know for certain that someone real high up there is scared of something." -- Right on the Web

More Hoplophobia

Hoplophobia: A term coined by Jeff Cooper to describe someone who has an irrational fear of firearms.

"An apparent organized flexing of Second Amendment rights last weekend was a bit too Wild West for some local citizens and business owners.

Police and deputies responded to a number of complaints about citizens packing sidearms at restaurants, stores and other public areas.

None of the gun carriers was cited." [link]

Notice once again the gun-grabber use of the "Wild West" fallacy. It is interesting to note that several people were approached by the police in several different areas, and guess what? Not one of them was a criminal or doing anything against the law. Even more surprising was not one of these law abiding gun owners later that day turned criminal and hurt anyone with their firearm. A bit later in the article we get this wonderful bit of "wisdom":

"Stellingworth and Undersheriff Thomas Finco said that citizens who exercise the right to carry guns openly should realize it alarms the public and police."

You know what, it doesn't matter! It alarms gun owners when others try to infringe on our rights. It alarms Americans when we hear report after report of police officers acting like criminals (see all these reports by David Codrea). It alarms the public when we, as American citizens are labeled as potential terrorists (MIAC, DHS Report, Virginia Police Report).

Certain people need to understand those that support personal responsibility, the United States Constitution, freedom, and liberty, are rarely those that you need to be afraid of, or alarmed about. If you want to know who to be alarmed about try turning on the T.V. and see what Congress is up to, pick up a newspaper and see what your elected officials are doing. Leave those of us that mind our own business and live our lives as we see fit alone.

Innocent Life Saved With Firearm

"A 42-year-old Midlothian man was fatally shot in self-defense Friday night, Arlington police said.

Rodney Kennedy was in his ex-wife's home when he was shot by his former father-in-law, 67, police said. The shooting happened at 10 p.m. during an altercation, according to reports." [link]

Purely conjecture, but based on past instances of events like these the man probably had a restraining order against him, broke or attempted to break in, was confronted by ex father-in-law and was shot. This could very well have ended badly if the woman would have been home alone with no firearm for protection. Like I said purely conjecture, but you can look to the past to see how these usually turn out.

Forget That Pepper Spray, Pack the Pistol

"The report found that the Department of Defense's Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Program (JNLWP) has spent $386 million since it was formed in 1996, and created exactly zero useful non-lethal weapons." [link]

Translation: Listen to what millions of law abiding gun owners have been saying for years. There is no substitute for a firearm. If you truly want to protect you and yours, you must be willing to learn, practice, and carry a firearm, there is not substitute. As Col. Jeff Cooper said: ""Fight back! Whenever you are offered violence, fight back! The aggressor does not fear the law, so he must be taught to fear you. Whatever the risk, and at whatever the cost, fight back!"