In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Gun lovers are not patriots, period
Josey1
Member Posts: 9,598 ✭✭
Gun lovers are not patriots, periodBy Sanjai TripathiI think last week was Second Amendment Week. I can't be sure. It might've been national potato week or Bavarian folk dancing month or some other important cause that owned the time. It was some recent week, however.The notification did get me to read it again. 'A well-regulated Militia, being necessary for the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.'After a couple times through, it still doesn't make sense. In any case, the circumstances when it was written are very different from now. It's time for Americans to let go of their religious need for guns. They are no longer necessary for the security of the free State.In 1791, when the Bill of Rights was ratified, the country was not far removed from the Revolutionary War. It was fought to give the people of the colonies the right to self-determination. King George III had used his standing army to suppress them. The colonists defeated these armies, in large part with state militias and citizen irregulars.Before the war, citizens were required to quarter, or give free room and board, to the British army. So afterwards, the new Americans were not sure if they even wanted to have a standing army.Some thought the best model for defense against foreign invasion was an amalgam of "well-regulated" local militias. Also during that time, modern democracy was brand new. There was a legitimate fear that the democratic experiment would not succeed. The government could have proven unstable and been taken over by autocratic forces, again foreign or domestic.So the first original justification for the Second Amendment is to help citizens defend against foreign aggression. The second justification is to defend against domestic tyranny by the government. I say that now both of those are rendered obsolete by the same factor. That is the Unites States military.We have now seen that the local militia model of defense is ineffective. A centralized military just works better. You won't find very many people who would argue that the military should be broken up into state-sized pieces.With the growth of the central military has come a reality that can't be ignored. If someone were to take over the government of this country and gain control of that military, there is no lightly armed citizen force that could stop them.Many people say that the right to bear arms is what protects our freedom and rights from an overbearing government, but there is no example of this. In Waco, Ruby Ridge, and on the back roads around the west there have been groups that have tried to take part against armed conflict with government agents. What they all have in common is that they were hopelessly outgunned. And they were only fighting the FBI and BLM, not the actual military.The good news is that we don't really have to worry about government tyranny anymore. The Republican democracy experiment has become a highly stable tradition and establishment.What I'm saying is that while we can't overthrow the government anymore, it's alright because we don't have to. If the people don't like it, they can elect a new one.The Second Amendment can and will be debated for a long time, but it really doesn't apply for the original reasons. There are other more debatable justifications people have for wanting to own guns.Many will say that it is to 'preserve freedom,' or whatever. I don't believe, however, that people truly buy guns for reasons that abstract though, unless they are cultists or survivalist nuts. Most people have simpler causes.One is simply the feeling of power. If you have ever used a gun, you know what it is like. It is pretty cool to shoot stuff, or to think how you could destroy something or someone with a little finger motion. While this is a fascinating emotion, I don't think that it justifies the proliferation of efficient deadly weapons in a peaceful society.A related and better reason people cite is that guns can be used for protection and prevention of crime by law-abiding citizens. This is still weak to me, though.There are numerous non-lethal methods for stopping most criminals, unless they are armed. Such is the situation we have gotten into. Since criminals can easily access guns, law-abiding citizens should be able to also to protect themselves.Gun advocates say that if they are restricted or outlawed, then only criminals will have them. This is true in the near term, but they fail to realize where criminals get their guns. They buy and steal from the law-abiding owners in the first place. If they were restricted or outlawed, the supply would dry up.The last reason people own them is for sport. Again, it is fun to shoot stuff, like animals or targets. I don't mind that, although for some reason I think it should be customary to eat what you kill. But again, the fun does not justify the proliferation of lethal weapons.We have them ingrained in our culture. The Second Amendment not so clearly guarantees our right to own them. So for now I propose a national registry. Like an automobile, people should have to apply for a license, prove their competence, and refrain from illegal use to keep the right to own a firearm.Law-abiding citizens realistically don't have anything to fear from registering with the government. Sales should be regulated and registered also. Certain types of weapons, ammo and accessories that have no legitimate sport or personal defense purpose are and should be banned.This would eventually soak up the pool of deadly weapons in the hands of criminals, at which point the law abiding citizenry could disarm. There are more than 100 million firearms in this country now. It is time for America to examine what it is going to do with so many guns. Related Links:Sanjai TripathiThe Daily BarometerJessica MainardAfterword: Jessica Mainard wrote what AFA believes to be an appropriate rebuttle to Mr. Tripathi's article. We couldn't have said it better. Thank you Jessica. March 14, 2002 Editor, Daily Barometer: In response to Sanjai Tripathi's article "Gun Lovers are Not Patriots, Period," he not only misconstrued a vital part of this country's history and heritage, but he misstated a number of important facts. He argued that our national standing military is efficient, and there is no need for it to be broken into a number of state-by-state pieces, but he should be reminded that the reason it doesn't need to be broken up, is because we have the National Guard (not a militia by the way), which does operate on a state-by-state basis because it is important and efficient to do so. He also doubted that the defensive use of firearms is less frequent than the criminal uses. In actuality, there are seven times as many defensive uses of firearms in this country as there are criminal misuses. (See John Lott, More Guns Less Crime, Uniform Crime Reports, and National Crime Survey). He scurrilously underestimated the number of firearms in this country as 100,000,000. The actual number of legally owned firearms which is conservatively estimated at 200,000,000. He neglects to acknowledge the existence of the black market in this country (or any other which has tight gun control laws), and maintains that eventually criminals will give up their guns. This is specious at best. I'm pro-choice. I believe that I or any other law-abiding, citizen should have a wide array of personal protection options. With about 2,000 felons "stopped" in mid-crime every year and annual estimates of defensive gun uses between 760,000 and 3.6 Million (Lott p. 11), I choose for myself, the most effective tool I know. A handgun. Let me see a "rape whistle," a keychain of pepper spray, or a well-lit parking-lot try to top that. Mr. Tripathi should have spent a little more time paying attention during Second Amendment week. He might have learned that inalienable rights are something that you are born with, and not granted. You're also not required to take advantage of them. You make your choice, and allow me to exercise my right to make mine. Sincerely, Jessica L. Mainard, Collegiate Programs Director Second Amendment Foundation http://www.armedfemalesofamerica.com/archive.php?aid=332
Comments
There is no apology for self defense. will270win@aol.com ~Secret Select Society Of Suave Stylish Smoking Jackets~
Protect our Constitutional Rights.
keep lots of extra uppers for your ar..you can change often enough to keep the thing from over heating...what ever caliber fits the moment..~Secret Select Society of Suave Stylish Smoking Jackets~
Truck Driver,Submarine Veteran,Rusty Wallace fan,and piss poor typist E-MAIL WNUNLEY@USIT.NET
Be bold in what you stand for, careful in what you fall for.
the hard stuff we do right away - the impossible takes a little longer
....Let's roll.
Pack slow, fall stable, pull high, hit dead center.
"ANY" EXCUSE IS A GOOD REASON TO BUY "JUST 1 MORE".& VICIE-VERSIE!
"The 2nd Amendment is about defense, not hunting. Long live the gun shows, and reasonable access to FFLs. Join the NRA -- I'm a Life Member."