Up In Arms

Here's an example of how I am too liberal for my conservative friends, and too conservative for my liberal friends: gun control.

Gun control has been on most peoples' minds lately, as it always is after a shooting spree.  And, as usual, there is overreaction on both sides.  Despite the desire to do something, anything, to try to prevent more deaths, there doesn't seem to be much we can do.  The suggestions from Obama are a start, and I think we at least need to see if we can keep clearly mentally unstable people away from guns.  I think an assault rifle ban would be pointless, because it wouldn't help much.  It didn't seem to help much before.  I do think people who want assault rifles for home defense are fooling themselves.  My brother was in the Army, was a platoon leader, etc.  Hunted, had guns.  But he knew an AR or AK was almost useless in a real-life home defense situation.  You want a pistol or shotgun.  So these folks are either stupid, or want to play army man.  And folks, if it comes down to you versus the real military, you are going to lose, even if you have an AK.  And even the illustrious Ronald Reagan said that an AK-47 is "not a sporting weapon or needed for defense of a home."

I just don't see any advantage to pushing for stricter gun control right now, despite the noise from the left. I think there are more pressing issues.  But as usual, reaction from the right has been more extreme, more vicious, less truthful, and just plain more stupid.  Because why let facts get in the way of a good story?  People shouting about Obama's 23 points as if they were a declaration of martial law.  People saying "don't take my guns!  No gun control!"  Guess what?  No-one's taking your guns.  And we already have gun control.  And we need it.  There should be regulations, background checks, etc., to keep felons and people with serious mental issues from easy access to guns.  Yes, they can still get them if they really try.  But nothing is perfect.  As a society, we just do the best we can, using commonsense rules.  Maybe more training.  Maybe deeper background checks.  The question is not gun control vs no gun control.  It's tinkering with laws we already have.  No, it's not the time for a revolution.  Calm the fuck down.  Some regulations are necessary: on free speech, guns, whatever.  It's called real life.  Don't make a mountain out of a molehill.  This stuff is being proposed, not enacted.  Some will be enacted, some won't, some will get watered down. It's a Republican Congress so a lot of the stuff you hate won't get in there anyway.  Relax.  Take your finger off the trigger.  Don't be a jerk.

Now let's get to the primary source here, the Second Amendment.  2nd amendment activists: please interpret it for me.  The whole thing, including the militia clause.  Because anyone who actually reads the thing (I know, reading is so 20th century) can't miss the fact that it's all about militias.  "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."

So that first clause is the reason behind the second clause, yes?  One, therefore the other.  So we need to keep it in mind as we think about the amendment as a whole.  Which is odd, because I NEVER see that first clause in NRA material, NEVER hear about it when I hear gun rights folks talk about the 2nd amendment.  But it was clearly important to the Founding Fathers, because they put it in.  In fact, it's the only amendment that includes a purpose.  So, assuming the Founders were smart, assuming we should take their intentions into account, maybe we ought to pay attention to that clause.  The guys at the Constitutional Convention didn't put the militia phrase in just for fun.  Remember, this was 14 years after Lexington and Concord.  And the Constitution was to replace the Articles of Confederation, which were considered weak.  But there were concerns about centralizing too much power.  In other words, I think the states wanted to be sure they could keep their militias.  And even in the second clause I hear echoes of militias: "keep and bear arms."  Not "hunt," not "defend your house."  They were talking collective defense.  Bearing arms.  Again, remember the 'shot heard round the world' was fired when the British were trying to confiscate militia arms caches.  The states were making sure they could keep their militias.  They didn't want a standing army (which we ended up with anyway.)

Now, in 2008 Supreme Court said that the 2nd amendment does guarantee an individual right.  That was almost 220 years after the Constitution was adopted, so you gotta wonder...  But okay, that's where we are now.  They also pointed out that regulation of individual firearms was fine.  Which I think is the whole point.  Some regulation is necessary, without overly restricting the right.  It's a safety thing: Guns don't kill people, but they make it MUCH easier to kill many people.

I don't think we ought to ban guns.  Most people who have them are careful, safe, and stable.  I might even get one soon.  And the amendment was written in a time when most people had a gun in their house, often even the same gun they used in the militia.  So I don't think the authors were trying to tightly restrict guns.   I think it was assumed that people would have them; but I know for a fact that it was not assumed that there would be no regulations, because even back then there were rules about them.

So let's all calm down and talk about this, using facts, not made-up crap.  Not something you heard or saw Rush or Glenn say.

Whew.  That was fun.  I might need to do more "position papers" like this on big topics.  And I'm sure I'll revisit this one sometime.


Here are a few things I read recently while thinking about this; obviously it's been on my mind a long time, so a full list of references is impossible.

Wikipedia's entry on the Second Amendment- gets into the legal details

Understanding the Second Amendment- because, you know, there are other rights that aren't limitless too

Snopes- Reagan AK quote

More facts please- rebuttals to the common gun rights nuttiness

Obama's Executive Orders- Calm down, folks

Some Constitutional Amendments Are More Equal Than Others- In fact, there are more than just the 2nd.  Who knew?