…continuing on from yesterday’s rant, I just want to make the clear point that Guns Are Bad.  They say guns don’t kill people; people kill people.  This is bulls***.   People with guns kill people.  How do you like them apples?

There is this common misinterpretation among conservatives of the Second Amendment of the US Constitution, which they think gives them the right to prance around their communities going, look at me, I’ve got a gun, so don’t mess with me.  Human beings, eh?

It’s true, the Constitution’s Second Amendment does contain the phrase, “the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”  Those who know what this phrase really means will still fling it at ‘liberals’ and go, See?  It says so here!  They hope that by blowing smoke in front of them, they won’t notice.

Those who don’t know what it means will fling it at liberals and go, See?  It says so here!  They split the sentence quoted above from the sentences before and after it, and they hope that the ‘libtards’ won’t notice that they don’t have a clue what it means.  But, to be fair, it is partly the fault of the writers of the Amendment, i.e. Congress, for phrasing it in the language with which it was used.  But then, this was back in 1791.

OK, it’s time to give you the Second Amendment in full:

“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.”

–ratified by Thomas Jefferson

Now, we could pick this sentence apart until the cows come home.  What it basically is telling us through the window of time is that because a well-regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state [I don’t agree with that, but let us for argument’s sake assume that it is], then the right of the people to keep and bear arms in the context of that militia shall not be infringed.  So, we need an army, and we need people who know how to use arms, so people should be allowed to keep those arms so that, when called upon, they can use them in anger.

What the Amendment does not tell us:

• That those arms are necessarily firearms
• Even if they are, that those arms are only the kind of weapons that were available at that time.  They do not relate to AK-47s and other assault rifles that are able to fire off over 100 rounds a minute and kill half a restaurant or a club in that short time.
• Even if you accept the common conservative interpretation of the Amendment, while you may have the right to keep and bear arms, there is no provision there for you to be able to use them.  Ever.  Ever.  Not outside the context of a militia, anyway.  The use of guns is for that militia or army only.  And even if you use your weapons in your militia, you may only use them in the process of securing yourself a free state.

 

So, people are robbing your home and killing your family.  You will probably use your weapons, I can’t stop you doing that, but expect the full punishment of the law.

Another popular argument is: If guns were “taken away from us,” (an almost child-like, weeping argument), then what happens if someone comes and robs your house, rapes your wife and kills your children?  Well, if no-one had guns, they couldn’t do that, could they?

As I said yesterday, all guns should be jettisoned into space, with a note attached for any alien civilisation to read: “This is what human beings do to each other.”  

Human beings are not the only great apes who kill their own species in land disputes or power disputes.  Chimpanzees do it, too.   But humans do have the added intelligence that it seems chimps do not, the power to make decisions based on conscience.

And finally, remember the fact that the Second Amendment was written in 1791. The kind of weaponry used today – even by civilians – simply was not taken into account 230 years ago because they were outside the bounds of human concept at the time.  No assault rifles, no machine guns, bombs or the like.  Then, you used to have to put powder and a lead ball in your guns.  The US patent for the revolver was not given until 1836.

We human beings do not have the power to change the past.  I wish I could, but it’s not possible.  But we do have the power to change the future.  We have the power to limit war, to eradicate it altogether, even if the Second Amendment said, “Come on, let’s f*** each other up!”  I would still argue against it.  But it doesn’t, if you read the sentence correctly, does it?

x