Politician Control

Gun control zealots seem to be motivated by an unhealthy, pathological fear of guns and a complete lack of understanding of the criminal mind.  They also suffer from the delusion that the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment does not say and mean what it says and means.  Quite simply, it says that the right of all U.S. citizens to keep (own) and bear (carry) arms shall not be infringed (limited, constrained).  Period.  Short of a constitutional amendment this is the supreme law of the land. 

Their quest to limit the kinds of guns citizens can own, to limit the amount of ammunition and size of magazines, to require gun registration, to require enhanced background checks and waiting periods and to limit where citizens can carry their arms is simply unconstitutional.  Furthermore, it flies in the face of logic.  Criminals intent on doing harm will buy guns on the black market, they will buy any sort of gun they want, they will not undergo background checks, they will buy all of the large magazines and all of the ammunition they want, they will not register those guns and they will carry and use those weapons anywhere and everywhere they choose, particularly in places they know that citizens are precluded from carrying weapons, such as schools.  Criminals are not going to obey any laws, hence the term criminal.  It seems that politicians are of the opinion that they can do anything, they can defy logic, they can simply pass a law and a problem is magically solved.  They are omnipotent.  They can go on television and claim how much they care and point to what they have done to stop crime.  In fact, they have done nothing of the sort.  In reality they have made it easier for criminals to do their dastardly deeds.  But, they have assuaged their delicate egos and garner the adulation of the uninformed, unthinking faction of the electorate.  Politicians need to own up to the fact that some problems are out of the reach of government and politicians to solve.  Be honest for once with the people.  Crime is not a political issue.  Evil is an inherent part of human nature.  Vigilance, preparation and overwhelming resistance is the answer to protecting people from crime.  It is ultimately a personal responsibility, not public.  Politicians cannot protect people from criminals.  Law enforcement cannot protect people from crime.  Taking a proven, effective tool (carrying weapons) out of the hands of law-abiding citizens puts them at greater risk of being a victim of crime.  That could, and should be construed as a crime. 

Gun Rights, or Wrongs?

The discussion of gun rights with gun control zealots often reverts to the concept of restrictions of other constitutional rights, classically the proscription of yelling ‘fire’ in a crowded theater.  This is actually a very good teaching point.  Of course, if there is a fire in the theater alerting other patrons is an act of heroism, not terrorism.  But if there is not fire and the intent is malicious, such an act could lead to harm or even trampling death of moviegoers.  This obviously is a crime.  But the crime is not in having the right of free speech, rather using it in a dangerous and malicious manner with intent to harm.  In this country we do not engage in prior censorship of speech or written word.  People are free to say or write anything, understanding that if this speech or writing is intentionally malicious and harmful it could result in criminal prosecution and punishment.  This is the deterrent function of the law.  The right of free speech remains unalienable.

Likewise, the right of private citizens to keep and bear arms is an unalienable right ensconced in the constitution, which means it too comes from God not government and it is the specific role of government to protect that right.  Similar to the example above, if a gun is used in a dangerous and malicious manner with intent to harm a crime has been committed with the gun.  That crime is proscribed by law and may result in arrest, prosecution and punishment which might include incarceration and the loss of the right of that individual to legally own a gun in the future.  The Second Amendment right still stands in the general sense.  There has been no prior censorship to gun, ammunition or magazine ownership by the general public at large.  Rather in specific instances individuals either with criminal records or clear dangerous mental instability may be lose the right to own a gun.  This is a very narrow sliver of the population and this practice must be cautiously monitored for government abuse. 

We do not gag people or cut out the voice boxes of people with propensities to speak dangerously or take typewriters away from subversive writers.  To proscribe gun ownership, ammunition ownership, or high-capacity magazine ownership or make such ownership so convoluted, complicated and monitored as to de facto make such ownership near impossible, is a general prior proscription of the Second Amendment right of the citizenry to keep and bear arms.  Clearly this is not the intent of the constitution or the proper role of government.  This is shades of Pre-Crime a la “Minority Report.” 

The proper role of government is to strain as far as possible to protect these God-given rights found in the constitution.  The constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens must not be adversely affected by the actions of government in prosecuting individuals who may have committed crimes in the exercise of their constitutional rights.