There’s a debate going on right now about the role of the Second Amendment in modern society. I’m not going to get into a reblog contest so I’ll make this my (hopefully) only statement on the matter.
I support the Constitution. I believe in the Bill of Rights. I believe the Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and that its importance should never be ignored. I also believe there is room, in legislative matters, to interpret the Constitution on a broader scale. But that does not mean the Constitution should be redefined or ignored.
When it comes to the First Amendment, I accept the literal meaning of the statement: “Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.” I’m not a fan of the FCC or any attempt at censorship. If the people don’t want to watch something, all that is needed is the press of a button on a remote. When it comes to the Second Amendment, I believe, as the Supreme Court established, that there is an individual right to bear arms, and to protect oneself in one’s own home. I don’t own a gun myself, but my parents do. They are not serial murderers. They are not hunters. They simply want the comfort in knowing that if somebody breaks into their house, they’re able to take action and not waste time waiting for the police. Sometimes a five minute wait is too long.
The realities of modern society must be recognized, however. I don’t believe it’s appropriate for a citizen to acquire a uzi or a bazooka. I believe that convicted criminals should not be allowed to acquire firearms, which is the law of the land. I believe people should be required to take training courses. I believe background checks should be mandatory nationwide. The Second Amendment is a very important thing. If somebody breaks into your home, would you rather wait ten minutes for the police, or would you rather take matters into your own hands and guarantee your safety and security? Again, in some situations, waiting five minutes for the police is not the safest option.
One person commented that Second Amendment didn’t do an appropriate job at preventing 9/11. That person is correct. The pilots on the planes did not have firearms with them, and I do not believe pilots are allowed to carry firearms at all due to federal law. Imagine what would have happened if the pilots had access to a firearm. The terrorists were armed with box cutters. Who do you think would have won that fight?
Sadly, we can’t deal with hypotheticals when it comes to 9/11. What happened, happened, and it cannot be changed. But law can be changed so the chances of such a tragedy occurring again go down.
Using the logic gun control proponents depend on, wouldn’t New York and New Jersey be the safest states in the country? Germany has some of the strongest gun control laws in Europe and that did not prevent a school shooting. On the campus of Virginia Tech, no guns are allowed. Imagine if a student had been allowed to carry a firearm. Would that tragedy have been so bad as it turned out to be?
If a person wishes to kill another, I imagine they would use any method they could. The United Kingdom has strong gun control laws. Knife violence is on the rise. An actor in the newest Harry Potter film was killed in such a way some time ago. There have also been cases of knife violence in Japan, another country with strong gun control laws. Should knives be banned, then?
You cannot support one portion of the Constitution at the expense of other portions. Dennis Kucinich likes to mention that he carries a copy of the Constitution in his pocket. This is the same man who introduced legislation to ban handguns, in direct violation of the Second Amendment. You either accept the entire Constitution, or none of it.
a very interesting and good point you make. i only reblog for one aspect of it. yes, knife fights and killings are on the rise in these anti gun countries. but, take this with you…. you can’t mow down a crowd of people with a knife. you typically don’t kill the wrong person with a knife. you don’t typically target people like sharp shooters with a knife. a knife is real personal, an up close in your face or behind your back weapon requiring at least some level of skill more than a trigger pull, along with the extended amount of time and proximity needed to “go for the kill” there are alot of scared young “men” who shoot at people they rob because they get scared and freek out. its alot harder to do that to their victims and bystanders with a knife. in miami, alot of kids and innocent people get killed by random stray gun fire, badly aimed gun fire, robberies gone wrong by fear of the perp, ect.. yes, you will not stop murderers, but you can decrease the number and frequency. you can recover from a stab more often than a shot to the head or body.
go hunting, care a regulated licensed piece, but spare me that example of countries with high knife violence rates.
