Back to Gaffer's Philosophy
Archives.
The Gaffer's Philosophy:
Part 85 About Guns:
January 12, 2004:
The next issue I want to address is that of guns and the second amendment. This is key to restoring the rule of law in America because there have been such gross abuses of this amendment by our government. As I have said before, the second amendment has to be the least ambiguous statement in the entire constitution. It is truly unequivocal. Here it is.
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.
There is no way any rational person could choose to misunderstand this. Yet pretty much every government we have had since the civil war has pretended to do just that. It says that the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. There are no conditions. It does not say that a citizen must have the permission of some government agency to carry a gun. Every gun permit law and ordinance in this country is a violation of this amendment. The government, at any level, has absolutely no right in law to require gun permits or concealed weapon permits.
Here is what Jefferson had to say. "The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."
Our culture is rapidly approaching tyranny in government, but the answer is not guns. The answer is to get ethical people into government. We don't need guns to do that. This is not Cuba and I am not Che Guevara. We can do it though the legal process with dedicated people. Then we can deal with this gun issue and all other issues. We can enforce the constitutional, prosecute criminals, and change the constitution if we need to.
Currently, we do have a number of problems with guns and our gun laws. One problem I see is this amendment does not specify a particular class or type of arms. The Violent Crime Control and Preventions Act (VCCPA) does, but it is a direct violation of this amendment. Specifically, the ban on semiautomatic weapons constitutes a violation of the second amendment. Its passage and signing were illegal acts by our government.
As to the enforcement of this VCCPA, it does not work anyway. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) has failed in this. They are unable or, I believe, unwilling to enforce this law. Recently there were several thousands of new guns which were lost and unaccounted for. The one the Washington snipers used was one of those. The shop which allegedly lost that gun is still in business. The ATF has not shut them down. There has been no real investigation. Do you believe that gun was ever really lost? I do not. I believe many gun shops are selling guns to criminals and reporting them as stolen.
So, we have two things wrong here. We have a law that is a direct contradiction of the second amendment and an enforcement agency that does not enforce it. That is just one case. Another law that is a violation of the second amendment is the Brady Bill. It calls for a 5-day waiting period and establishes a national computer network in order to check the backgrounds of gun buyers. That law is usually, not always, enforce.
Now who gets messed over in all of this? Not the criminals. They have all of the ordnance they need. The guy who gets screwed is the law abiding citizen who want a hunting rifle. He has to go through some nonsense hoops before he can get one. Perhaps it would be worth it if it kept crooks from getting guns, but we know it does not.
When our founders wrote the second amendment, pretty much every man in the new world had a long rifle with min balls and a powder horn. Things have changed considerably since then. Perhaps we do need an amendment to modify the second amendment. At that time there were no repeating weapons at all, let alone an assault rifle. The Gatling Gun was invented in 1861 almost 100 years later.
We may need to change the gun laws and put congress in charge of the distribution rules. For that we can define two classes of weapons. First is recreational which anyone may have and use within limits. The states and local communities must have a right to determine the limits of use. The other class of weapon is non-recreational. The use of these is limited to police or military organizations. We must try to stop people from forming and arming private armies. We should have strict laws to punish the illegal possession or use of such weapons.
If we wish to modify the second amendment the way to do it is with another amendment. It works. That is how we threw prohibition out. Making contradictory laws is a stupid quick fix way to make change. It is what we have come to expect of a stupid quick fix government. A new amendment to the constitution is a lot of work and it should be. Changing our basic law should not be easy. It should require thought and effort. I think we can keep the intent of the second amendment and still make better provisions for public safety. We need only make exceptions to the amendment.
Here is my list of exceptions.
No one except military personnel may keep or carry automatic
weapons.
No one except military personnel may keep or carry weapons of
mass destruction.
No one may own or carry a firearm until they have been trained
and certified in the safe use of firearms.
All firearm owners must be re-certified at least every two years.
All firearms must be registered.
Firearms may not be discharged except in legally designated areas.
Know felons may not own or carry firearms of any kind.
States and local governments may regulate the ownership and the
use of firearms.
When new weapons or arms are developed, the congress shall have
the duty to classify them as suitable for the use of the general
public or not suitable, that is recreational or nonrecreational.
Now, we know the NRA and others would object and make a great deal of noise about this. Right now this outfit is very powerful. If we let them, they can be very effective in influencing legislation. This is not because they have the support of the American people. They do not! It is because our politicians are for sale. The way we change that is to get our current crop of garbage out of the legislature and get ethical people in. Then the NRA would have influence proportional to their actual power. That would be practically none.
Here is what I said in another essay. I'll stay with it. The
NRA is not a super national organization with billions of members.
It is a relatively small organization; much smaller than, say,
the American Association of Retired People (AARP). Their power
comes from their wealth which they use to influence our legislators.
I believe the NRA consists of one very determined man with a handful
of very wealthy, shadowy financial supporters and a large number
of true believers.
Back to Gaffer's Philosophy
Archives.
|
|
|
|