Posts Tagged ‘Right to bear arms’

The second amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America states: “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.”

I do not on a regular basis ever offer my opinion on any right in this country, that being the United States of America, but I do have to speak out now. Why? Because just about everyday on the news I hear about senseless shootings and deaths. Yesterday, locally, two deputies were shot and killed, and a third person, who was trying to keep his vehicle from being carjacked, was shot in the head and is in critical condition. Also yesterday, a teenager at a school in Washington State killed one person and injured four others before turning the gun on himself.

So, let us look at the second amendment shall we? Yes, let us look at this amendment. The reason why you will see in this post.

“A well regulated Militia:” This refers to: “A military force that is raised from the civil population to supplement a regular army in an emergency.”

“being necessary to the security of a free State,” I believe the meaning of this is that at the time when this country was formed because at that time we needed to do what needed to be done to ensure that this country was not under the control of anyone else other than ourselves.

“the right of the people to keep and bear Arms…” To me this means that the people of this country had the right at that time to defend themselves as a well regulated Militia…

“shall not be infringed.” And that to protect this new country, this right shall not be infringed upon so that they could defend this new country.

OK – Now let us put together my translation: The United States Armed Forces, shall secure for our country, the right to keep our country safe and under our own control by giving the the right of those same Armed Forces the right to bear arms to keep our country secure.

Now let me ask this question: Is this country abiding by this amendment? I kindly ask that you, a citizen or not, answer this question. Here are recent events in the United States of America that might help you make this decision whether or not the founders of this great country had these circumstances in mind.

April 20, 1999 – Columbine High School – 13 dead. 12 students and one teacher. 24 injured.

January 11, 2011 – Gabrielle Giffords is shot outside of a grocery store in Arizona, 6 are killed and 13 others are wounded.

December 14, 2012 – Sandy Hook Elementary School – 154 rounds of ammunition were fired. 24 people, both children and adults are shot. 20 were children. They were between the ages of 6 – 7 years old. These 20 are dead. This is the deadliest mass shooting ever in the country, and the second deadliest mass shooting at a school by a single person in US history. The weapon was a Bushmaster .223 assault weapon.

Did you know that since 2010 there have been 95 shootings at schools around the U.S.? Of this there were 98 deaths and 111 injured.

I just gave you some examples of gun use and death to citizens in this great country. Do any of these shooters appear to you to be a “regulated Militia?”

Now the National Rifle Association (NRA) will tell you that everyone is entitled to possess a gun in this country. They tell you it is not the guns that kill or injure people, it is people killing or injuring people. If people do not have guns then they wouldn’t be able to kill or injure anyone, would they?

Pew Research recently did a poll which indicated that the country is split over gun ownership, however 90% of those polled want there to be background checks on everyone purchasing a gun. The NRA threw all kinds of money to oppose background checks. Hmm…Why would they oppose background checks? Because gun manufacturers are behind the NRA and they are more concerned with their bottom line. Ka-ching! Yes, it is all about money!

Smart gun technology is out there but the NRA, who has lots of money for lobbying politicians, opposes this too, as well as those same gun manufacturers and gun retailers. Smart Gun technology that would only allow the purchaser of the gun to use the gun, by way of fingerprint recognition, is out there. There is ongoing debate that has to do with a law passed in New Jersey in 2002 that states that once the technology is proven reliable, the law to require this technology will go into place within 3 years of that determination. The law has not yet gone into place. The reason the NRA opposes this is they believe it weakens the 2nd amendment.

I propose a solution: Do not sell bullets! If it was more difficult to obtain bullets we have less senseless death.

I know that I will most likely hear from those who support the NRA’s view, which is fine. I am just exercising my first amendment right: Freedom of speech!

Read Full Post »