Monday, October 9, 2017

The Second Amendment

“Amendment II A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right to bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Since the recent tragic shooting in Las Vegas and a new push from progressives to improve gun control, I am reviewing my understanding of the gun issue. One often hears comments from the Left about not needing automatic weapons, silencers or armor piercing bullets to shoot “Bambi”. The Right argues that the Constitution guarantees our right to own guns. In reality I think the pro and anti-gun control people are talking past each other and not understanding what actually is at issue. The progressives have a very naive view of gun ownership while conservatives have a more nuanced one. If one takes a careful look at the second amendment there is not even the slightest hint of hunting or even gun ownership per se. It talks about “bearing arms”. Hunters don’t “bear arms, they “carry guns”. Combatants “bear arms”. Basically the amendment says that the bearing of arms may be needed to ensure a free state and thus this right cannot be abridged. Michael Lerner, a progressive San Francisco Rabi wrote a book entitles “The Left Hand of God”. The basic premise is that there is a continuum we all stand on and at the right end of which there sits a vengeful, thunderbolt wielding God smiting sinners, while at the other end there sits a loving, gentle God, forgiving sinners and caring for the needy ( the “Sermon on the Mount” God). Our general view of the world and our politics depend on our position on this continuum which in part may be influenced by our physiology and definitely our culture. At the right end we tend to be pessimistic, thinking everyone is grabbing all they can get and if we don’t get in and stop them or grab our share we will have nothing. At this end, politically we are conservatives. At the other end we view our fellow man as, for the most part, good with a few bad apples here and there, and tend to be progressive. People on the right end of the continuum, worrying about their fellow man’s aggression, want to have a gun in the house to protect themselves. People at the left end, being optimists, tend not to feel the need for this protection and think guns are more of a danger than a protection. Let me get back to bearing arms. From the right hand side of the continuum, the country is always under threat; from the Commies in the fifties, the Godless hippies in the sixties, the Blacks always, the Hispanics at the end of the last century and since 9/11, the Muslims. The government is always in danger of being overtaken by one of these groups and even it does not fall to any of them, it may be weakened and unable to protect us from them. In this case we need to be able to arm ourselves and form militias to not only protect ourselves but our very freedom. In fact, even as we speak, there are militias arming, training and organizing for just such an event. Given this outlook, it is only rational that the “arms” need to be military grade and not hunting rifles. Armor piercing bullets, automatic weapons, silencers and more are necessary. Even the argument of restricting weapons based on government screening to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people is a threat. A corrupt government could wrongfully claim certain citizens are not mentally stable and deny them the right to guns. (The Soviet Union had mental hospitals full of dissidents put into institutions instead of jails so as not to put them on a stand and give them an opportunity to voice for their arguments) Another move to protect ourselves is to militarize our police forces, getting retired heavy military weaponry into local control. Back a couple of years ago I read about a sheriff somewhere down South creating a posse armed to the teeth to protect their community from the oncoming Muslim plight. In pictures of this posse I saw trucks with heavy machine guns mounted on their beds, all proudly flying our stars and stripes, demonstrating their patriotism. (My gut reaction at the time was to think “what kind of a patriot are you when you think your country is so weak as to not be able to protect us and you from a bunch of guys in robes riding camels and carrying automatic weapons”.) Indeed each side thinks it is patriotic. The Right displays its patriotism by wanting to protect our freedom with arms if necessary while the Left with its faith that our government and democracy is strong, resilient and, as it had in the past, able to withstand foreign assaults (War of 1812) and local insurrections (Civil War). So the real discussion should not be what guns and what regulations but how do we ensure our freedom through our institutions and ensure that our government works for us, all of us, and not only for a small portion of the population.

0 comments: