The amount of information on this topic is enough to “sink a battleship,” as the old saying goes. It is not my intent, therefore, to rehash what has already been written. I have personally read endless articles ad nauseam attempting to gain a reasonable balance on this subject, but the line of disagreement on this topic is literally breathtaking for its brashness and vitriol.
No doubt you have read about guns being removed from the German people in the 1930s and the obligatory comparisons to America’s battle over gun control today. Then there are the stories about the removal of guns from the people of Australia. I have read articles about our Aussie friends that claim the rise in crime “Down Under” is frightening since guns have been outlawed; and at the same time I’ve read articles claiming that the rate of crime, particularly violent crime (read: guns), has been significantly reduced. Which do you believe? But is that even the question to ask?
The arguments from both sides are frequently written so as to confuse the issue, or to appeal to the emotions, or to fall back on the ever popular “It’s for the children!” mantra.
Allow me to cut to the chase.
When the issue of gun control pops up it has more to do with those who ultimately control the guns. In the case of Germany as mentioned earlier, it was decided by the Hitler regime that only certain people and groups would be allowed to have guns. This placed every other German citizen at the mercy of the ones who controlled guns.
In America today there are hundreds upon hundreds of state and federal gun control laws. It is virtually impossible to enforce these laws, yet every time we have another senseless shooting that staggers our senses, our politicians quickly jump on the need for stricter gun control. This obviously plays well with those who are fearful of violence. So they are willing to surrender Constitutional rights for the smoke-screen of gun safety.
Just a couple of weeks ago a man broke into a home where a mother and her twin nine-year olds were enjoying the comforts of their home. The mother heard the bad guy knocking on the door at one o’clock. Something did not seem right to this lady, so she ushered her kids into a closet where there was a crawl space for them to hide. She took up her defensive position in the closet, brandishing a pistol she had been trained to use, and waited. When the bad guy opened the closet door she started banging away – Pop, Pop, Pop, Pop, Pop, Pop! All six rounds. The perpetrator was hit five times in the face and neck, falling to the floor. She grabbed her kids and ran to a neighbor’s home. The guy, surviving the flurry of bullets, was shortly picked up by the police. What might have happened if this lady did not know how to use a gun? We read about those stories all the time. Certainly a person should be allowed to defend themselves against personal attack. But there’s more.
The question then is about rights. It has been said that the 2nd Amendment does not give us the right to bear arms, because rights can only come from God.
Guns were first made in 12th Century China. So it was several centuries later that guns were a problem in England. The king, James the II, fearful of his enemies, decided that Protestants should not be allowed to have guns. An English law, the 1689 Bill of Rights, changed all that. “Subjects, which are Protestants, may have Arms for their Defense.”
The issue is one of taking the necessary steps to protect oneself from an overbearing, intrusive and unjust government. Because our Founding Fathers in America, most of who came from England, remembered well the problem of gun control in Jolly Old England, made sure those same provisions were implemented in the U.S. Constitution. The Second Amendment reads, “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.” To infringe means “to encroach upon in a way that violates law or the rights of another.”
My point is this: When the government attempts to subvert the Constitution by violating those Amendments which were intended for the protection of “We the people,” then we cannot remain silent.
I, along with my fellow countrymen, have the Constitutional right to protect and defend.