As one who
loves our Constitution, I have strong feelings in favor of the 2nd
Amendment. I don’t write about that issue very often, because there are many
others who are more clearly laying out the issue than I can. But the onslaught
since last month, along with the president’s unprecedented 23 executive order
yesterday, merit some comment.
Here are the
two main points:
· The
main purpose of the 2nd Amendment is to guarantee the God-given
right for individuals to protect themselves against attack—from any (Spherical
Model) southern hemisphere attacker, either from the chaos side, as criminals
are, or from the state tyranny side, either foreign or domestic.
· The
only purpose of an executive order is to direct federal employees in the manner
in which they will enforce duly legislated laws; the executive branch does not
have power to make laws for individual or all Americans.
One of the
best things I’ve read in the past month is a 13-part essay by my Facebook
friend Shawn Rogers. He does have a blog, with a small part there: www.sbrogerstx.blogspot.com. But
to get the full essay, you’ll need to “friend” him and start reading in the
last half of December 2012. One article he recommends a piece by Larry Correia,
from December 20, 2012, called “An Opinion on Gun Control.” It’s a very long
but worthwhile piece (18 pages, about 10,000 words). This part comes after you’ve
scrolled down a ways (links are from original):
It doesn’t really make sense to ban guns, because in
reality what that means is that you are actually banning effective
self-defense. Despite the constant hammering by a news media with an agenda,
guns are used in America far more to stop crime than to cause crime.
I’ve seen several different sets of numbers about how
many times guns are used in self-defense every year. The problem with keeping
track of this stat is that the vast majority of the time when a gun is produced
in a legal self-defense situation no shots are fired. The mere presence of the
gun is enough to cause the criminal to stop….
So how often are guns actually used in self-defense in
America? http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcdguse.html
On the high side the estimate runs around 2.5 million
defensive gun uses a year, which dwarfs our approximately 16,000 homicides in
any recent year, only 10k of which are with guns. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/homicide.htm
Of those with guns, only a couple hundred are with rifles. So basically, the
guns that the anti-gunners are the most spun up about only account for a tiny
fraction of all our murders.
But let’s not go with the high estimate. Let’s go with
some smaller ones instead. Let’s use the far more conservative 800,000 number
which is arrived at in multiple studies. That still dwarfs the number of
illegal shootings. Heck, let’s even run with the number once put out by the
people who want to ban guns, the Brady Center, which was still around 108,000,
which still is an awesome ratio of good vs. bad.
So even if you use the worst number provided by people
who are just as biased as me but in the opposite direction, gun use is a huge
net positive. Or to put it another way, the Brady Center hates guns so much
that they are totally cool with the population of a decent sized city getting
raped and murdered every year as collateral damage in order to get what they
want.
Unlike the
DOJ (I’m referring to the Fast and Furious debacle), I am in favor of keeping
guns—of any kind that will shoot even a single bullet—out of the hands of
violent criminals. That is already the law. So it’s puzzling why it would take
four full years before this president finally mentions to his employees that
they should enforce that law.
I am also in
favor of keeping guns out of the hands of the criminally insane, even if they
haven’t yet committed a violent crime. But doctors are not employees or agents
of the federal government, and any directive to them is an overreach. And, as
with all power overreaching, the unintended consequences bring about almost
exactly the opposite of the stated intended result. If people thank that simply
going for treatment for a mental illness, either for themselves or for a family
member, could result in forfeiting their 2nd Amendment rights, that
discourages people from seeking treatment, resulting in more untreated mentally
ill.
While I
appreciate having a criminal data base, so that background checks can be quick
and thorough, I am against any federal database identifying law-abiding
citizens who own guns. There is no Constitutional reason for such a database,
but it does hold the potential of laying the groundwork for the federal
government to move ahead with an incremental encroachment on our civil
liberties.
I appreciate
the Texas response to the president’s overreach, pointing out the hypocrisy. I also appreciated the Wyoming response, to arrest any federal agent who
attempts to enforce federal gun laws in that state. A growing number of states have
responded that they will nullify any attempt by the federal government to
infringe on the 2nd Amendment rights of citizens within their
states. In addition, various US Congressmen, such as Rand Paul, are putting forth legislation to nullify
those 23 executive orders, defund them, and press the Senate to file a court
challenge to them.
Standing up
against tyranny is exactly what the 2nd Amendment is about, so that’s
what I like to see.
That being
said, one of the interesting things I came across this week was Glenn Beck’s
suggestion on Monday that there is a better way of standing up against tyranny
than shooting any federal agent that shows up to take your guns. Resist, but
don’t attack. (The full video clip is below.) I’m reminded that Ghandi spent a
number of years in prison, when the government was in the wrong to put him
there. It may be that, before Americans have a moral right to violently
respond, a number must first be willing to say no, stand firm, and suffer even
wrongful incarceration, to prove the wrongfulness of the tyranny—which is
something best thought of in the calmness of theory before any of us must face
it in reality.
No comments:
Post a Comment