"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." So says the Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States. Unfortunately, Ted Kennedy, Chuck Schumer, and other gun control advocates disagree. They claim that the prevalence of hand guns and the dreaded assault rifles is the fuel, if not the direct cause, of crime, and only when we rid society of guns can we build the utopia of which most liberal dreams. This belief, however, is completely absurd. Because gun control laws clearly violate the Constitution, have a dark history of failure and misuse, strip individuals of their only means of protection, and leave criminals virtually unhindered, gun control legislation will never work, and ought to be repealed.
It has been claimed by gun control advocates, that the Second Amendment allows only for the assembly of a militia. Having been written in a time, these advocates maintain, when citizens were expected to provide their own weapons when serving in the military, the Constitution only allows private ownership for military purposes and no others. In the modern age, when the military supplies each soldier with a weapon, private ownership for military reasons is no longer necessary. Hence, they claim, gun control laws do not violate the Second Amendment, because the Second Amendment is simply outdated.
While gun control advocates will never admit it, gun control is a clear violation of both the spirit and the letter of the Constitution. The Second Amendment guarantees, "[that] the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." Private ownership of guns is explicitly listed as a right, and rights cannot be legislated! The government cannot pass laws regarding speech, or religion, or assembly. Therefore, the government should not be able to regulate our ownership of fire arms, especially considering the past uses of gun control.
It is common knowledge among historians and political scientists, that the first step in creating a dictatorship is disarming the masses. However, a large portion of the people in this country still believe more gun control is needed, not less, in spite of the fact that every gun control law aimed at crime reduction that has ever passed has been a dismal failure. Many people seem to believe that we can legislate our way to utopia. It is unfortunate that the past thirty years of "great society" social programs and expanding government regulation have conditioned these people to think of the government as their savior. If one looks at the latest ex President, they will find his whole election campaign was based on what he was going to make the government do for us, not what was best for America. Perhaps President Clinton should heed the words of his idol, John Kennedy, who said, "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country."
Beyond even the Constitutional, social, and historical aspects, gun control simply does not work. It strips honest people of their only real means of protection, while scarcely being an inconvenience to the criminal element in society. The Brady Bill is a perfect example. The Brady Bill mandates that all states impose a seven day waiting period before the purchase of a handgun. This is suppose to allow time for a background check to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and lunatics, and for a "cooling-off period" to prevent crimes of passion. Unfortunately, the Brady Bill would only work if the following three conditions were met: the criminal/nut does not know that he can obtain a handgun on the thriving black market; he is not willing to buy a rifle or shotgun, which are unregulated by Brady, to do his business; and the person who was ready to commit murder on day one of the waiting period will have calmed down by day seven and stay calm for the rest of his life. Taken separately, these conditions are unlikely, at best. Taken together, they are ludicrous.
So what are we going to do about these unjust and, I think, blatantly stupid gun control laws? The only logical thing to do with a law that does more harm than good, is repeal it. Will that magically make everything better? No, but it would be a good place to start. If we repeal the gun control laws, we will be forced to re-examine our role, that is the role of the individual in society. We will need to instill more civic mindedness and maturity in our youth. In short, we will need to assume more responsibility for ourselves, our families, our well being, and our communities.
This new sense of responsibility sounds like too much to hope for. It probably is too much to hope for. Right? Wrong! It's not more than we can hope for, it's the least we can demand, because we're demanding it of ourselves. Many lame-brained liberall tell us repeatedly that we must understand the rage that drives men to violence, we must strive to correct the injustices of society that fuels that rage. We must ignore these idiots. That mentality is called appeasement and it rarely works. If you recall, former President Bush tried appeasing Saddam Hussein before the Gulf War started. Bush kept saying that he was attempting to bring Saddam back into the family of nations, whatever that is. Then President Clinton gave us the same "family of nations" song and dance about Serbia and whomever else was currently on the official "bad-guy" list. But, did it work? Did we appease Saddam out of Kuwait? Or was it our military that liberated Kuwait? Bullies, be it a despotic dictator, or a member of a street gang, respect only force, and will be kept in line by no other means. Deep in their hearts, most people know this is true. This is proved by the dramatic rise in gun sales immediately following the L.A., riots. The June 1, 1992 issue of U.S. News and World Report claimed "Statewide, gun sales for the first half of May were up 62% over the same period a year ago." Why? Gun sales went up because the people wanted protection, plain and simple. They knew that gun control laws would not stop the armed rioters and looters any more than police could. This is certainly common knowledge to watchers of the gun market.
Most people who favor gun control have good intentions. They feel gun control is a way of keeping guns out of the hands of criminals. You would have to be insane to oppose that. But sooner or later, they realize that criminals having guns is not the problem, only a symptom of a problem. The real problem is the criminals themselves, and the defenseless position most victims find themselves in.
While society has the responsibility to deal with criminal offenders, we must remember two of the most important principles that this country is founded on. These principles are freedom, and the right of American citizens to be assumed innocent until proven guilty. We cannot pass laws that restrict Constitutionally granted rights on the grounds that these rights might be abused. The violation of these two principles is, I believe, the central issue in the gun control debate. Gun control assumes that anyone who wants to own a gun is a criminal or is mentally unstable.
In summary, as long as America has her Constitution and the American people have their freedom, gun control is doomed to failure. The voting majority may get duped into false hopes of abolishing crime through legislation and regulation, however, as the regulations begin to weigh down upon our private lives and gnaw away at our freedoms, with no discernable decrease in crime or violence, popular support will dwindle. Gun control advocates may have their day today, however, they have no future.
Facebook
Twitter