Our Founders are frequently criticized for including an amendment forcing the government to acknowledge the inherent right of citizens to buy, own and carry guns. The arguments generally go as follows:
1. We have police. No one “needs” a gun.
2. If we have guns, nowhere will be safe. Shooters will be everywhere.
3. You only “need” a basic rifle to hunt.
4. Guns are inherently unsafe.
5. The Founders had only flintlocks and the like. Modern weapons are too dangerous for the public.
6. …and more
Those who criticize the 2nd Amendment know the primary purpose; they simply don’t want to talk about it as it hurts their case, or, in the case of politicians, scares them.
When the Founders drew up the guidelines for a new form of government, they knew that no design is foolproof (and now we have the fool to prove the risk). Power corrupts and even with power designed to be distributed over the three branches of government, the signers had a concern that over time, the thirst for power would result in a federal state incongruent with freedom and equality. The 2nd Amendment was designed primarily to enable to the people to again retake the government should it be necessary. They all remembered the challenge of marshalling arms against the King. In the Bill of Rights, the goal was to clarify the rights we all have as people and to constrain the government, to keep it small, but to empower citizens to overthrow it if necessary. This scares our elected politicians.
We have a LOT of gun control laws, but many of them are frank infringements on the 2nd Amendment, aimed solely at law-abiding citizens, not the bad guys. Too often, those laws aimed at protecting citizens are set aside in order to speed prosecution – to cut deals. If the courts focused on criminals, we wouldn’t need many of the gun laws, as they would be irrelevant. Many sheriffs and police actually welcome armed, trained citizens, as they know that in most cases, they are only there to pick up the pieces, not to prevent crime.
Surveys don’t reflect the truth. Probably around half the adults in the US have one or more guns, but most won’t admit it for fear of being targeted. Aside from the pleasure of target practice and hunting, few will ever need to defend themselves or their families. And even in many of the cases of self-defense, brandishing the weapon is enough. Gun owners (and even many cops) say they hope never to have to fire a gun at another person. Sadly, in too many places, the “good guy with the gun” is held back from acting to save lives due to punitive laws that would bankrupt him and his family as well as land him in jail if he acts.
What’s particularly confusing about the issue is how many of those who claim to hate guns and want everyone to be disarmed actually have guns themselves or employ others with guns for protection, a luxury few of us can afford. I wonder what they would tell the single mother walking to the bus after a long night working at a hospital, scared of her shadow, or the family huddled in the only apartment they can afford, hoping that tonight, none of the gang warfare will touch their home.
If you really believe that good people shouldn’t have guns, I challenge you—give up your own guns first. Fire your armed guards and Secret Service. We’re all equal under the law, but it’s the poor that pay the price for your “lofty” ideals. Maybe you’d feel differently about gun control if you had to face the world defenseless.
While life is easy under the aegis of armed security, our politicians and Hollywood are buffered from the reality of modern life. Even when attacks come close, they can summon protection for their neighborhood, stealing it from those who are constantly under threat. (Can you hear me, Lori Lightfoot?) Do the rest of us not deserve to feel safe?
Perhaps it isn’t about safety at all. Maybe you know that increasingly, the government doesn’t represent the people’s will and you’re afraid they may once again take up arms against you. If that’s your truth …. Good. You should be afraid.
Absolutely agree many of the gun laws are already clear violations of the 2nd amendment but as we know under a leftist government violating, or as they like to say "reimagining", the constitution is simple, especially, if the SCOTUS upholds the interpretation. There are no other avenues of redress.