Gun Control
Saturday marks the one-year anniversary of the horrific Sandy Hook Elementary School shootings in Newtown, Connecticut. There will be appropriately solemn memorials and anguished discussions on gun control and resources to recognize and treat the mentally ill. Videos of President Obama’s pledge to do something about gun violence will be replayed and commentators will point out that nothing has been done. Some will say that if the slaughter of 20 children didn’t motivate the nation to do something about guns, then nothing will. And others will say that attempting to control guns would only keep them out of the hands of law-abiding citizens and do nothing to lower the homicide and suicide rate.
I’ve thought long and hard on this topic, and have come to the regrettable conclusion that there is little that can be done in our current situation. There are too many guns floating around – several hundred million by some estimates – and recent court decisions have made it clear that it was the framers’ intention in the Second Amendment to guarantee personal gun ownership.
What I wonder about, though, is what the framers would have set down had they been able to anticipate the state of technology and the body politic in the early years of the 21st century.
As we all know by heart, the amendment 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.” And despite earlier Supreme Court interpretations of the phrase, such as United States v. Cruikshank in 1876, and United States v. Miller in 1939, there is no current public will to shed our firearms.
But what if the framers could have known that :
(a) firearms would evolve from single-shot weapons that had to be reloaded after each firing into weapons that could fire many rounds, and that handguns would become more practically lethal than rifles;
(b) it therefore would be possible for one individual to kill a large number of people by himself with a single weapon;
(c) the state and national defense would not be dependent on a get-up militia of citizen soldiers, but on a highly organized standing army, navy, air force, national guard and police forces that would remain constituted through war and peace;
(d) motorized, self-propelled vehicles on land, sea and air, as well as guided missiles, drones and other remote-controlled devices would render the firearm as virtually useless in countering any hostile government action against the individual citizen;
(e) there would be more than 10,000 murders (nearly 70 percent of all homicides) and nearly 20,000 suicides (more than half of the total) per year using guns, and that guns would be used in the overwhelming percentage of violent crimes;
(f) our homicide rate would dwarf that of every other westernized and/or civilized nation in the world?
If the framers could predict that future, would they have framed the Second Amendment as they did?
I somehow doubt it. For one thing, all other indications suggest they were just too smart for that.
And for another, they had young children of their own.
The 2nd Amendment by it’s language has always seemed clear to me…the right to bear arms is…ONLY…for a…WELL regulated…MILITIA….to protect the country and NOT in any way for common citizens. I’m sure the Framers would not have denied any man his ‘hunting gun’ necessary to survival (nor would I).
But the modern collection of guns, the cult of guns, the massed produced in the 100’s of millions of guns just for commercial profit, the military guns, the entire public, every man woman and child in the USA armed to the teeth with guns to only use against each other. I can’t believe this was the Framers wish or predicted, or would even be sane for anyone.
I totally disagree with the Supreme Court and it’s rulings on the subject. The Court can be changed by easily changing the judges through politics, and all the past rulings can be thrown out.
Mark says in para 2 of the article…. he regrets this cannot be done in our life time…I regret it too…but for inspiration I paraphrase Robert Kennedy….’There are those that look at things the way they are and ask why? But we dream of things that never were…and ask….why the heck not?’
I firmly believe change will come to the USA and we will strip these people of their guns (except for well regulated hunting pieces and militia). I agree it probably will not happen in our life time, and maybe not even in that of our children but it….’will’ happen.
To paraphrase RFK/ JFK again…’They say it can’t be done in our lives, that it will be hard, and a long road…so…why should we not start now?’
I am optimistic to believe that history moves – or lurches – in one direction, so hopefully, with luck, you are right, Watson.
I am curious as to what John Douglas has t say about school shootings. Is there somewhere I can find out? On this website, or any of his books? I’d love to read more by John Douglas himself…
In truth, our v.a. Hospitals are secure our govt buildings are – just our citizens are not – gov = protecting themselves first
To say we need gun control legislation to stop work and school violence is lolly gagging on the issue – sorry for over posting but it annoys me
I’m just saying school shootings should end regardless of gun control – clear bags can be made a rule for visitors and students and u can have a checkpoint without much cost added
I’m one that thinks stuff left easily to be found wants to be found whether it be guns to anything else.
Nobody counts the times guns save lives.
I understand gun control – nobody wants children gunned down. I study repetition tho, almost like profiling, and if these gunmen are getting into schools the same way each time while we ‘know’ guns are on the street, who is to blame? Cities, states, gov bc zero gov does anything whichever side u on. If I ran a school, I could stop 1 gunman. These cases are bullied or hate me anger type complex.
I’m into the disappearance of tennis coach Paul arber wondering why that sounds like a few I have heard before. Mysteries maybe. Intrigue me.