Amendment # 2: Protection From Tyrrany

Hello friends,

I write today in hopes of clearing some confusion regarding our second amendment rights. Many believe this is an outdated portion of our Constitution, a throw-back to a lawless time when it was every man for himself. I would like an opportunity to set the record straight.

First, let's start by quoting the famous document that so many of us hold dear to our hearts. The second amendment reads as follows:

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.

Please note that this begins by establishing that a militia, or armed populace, is necessary to the security of a free state. This is my very point. The right to bear arms is not a matter of pride or a leftover from a bygone era; it is a means to ensure the government does not over-step its bounds and enslave an unarmed populace as well as giving the people the right and ability to defend themselves against foreign tyranny.

It is my personal belief that every household in America should have a gun in it, and that the residents of those homes should be trained to use their firearms. There are many things to be gained from arming the public.

First, the crime rate was actually lower when criminals were reasonably sure their opponents were armed. At one point in time, nearly every man and woman on the streets was carrying at least one weapon. People were politer in those days. The connection is not a coincidence. If the vast majority of the populace is armed, well, the chances of a successful mugging go down a bit, don't they?

People used to sit at home with their doors unlocked. Why did that change? These days, particularly if you live in certain places where gun ownership is severely restricted, criminals know that very few people are well-armed, even at home. Once upon a time, people sat as families in the main room of the house. In that room, there were likely to be several guns, and Pa was likely to have at least one on his person. People didn't live in fear of what would happen if someone entered their home; forced entry just meant the door was busted up before the invader was shot. I personally don't worry much about home invasion. Aside from the protection of my two dogs, I am rarely more than 10 feet from a pistol or revolver when at home. I feel sorry for the invader of my space who does not sit quietly and wait for the police once he realizes how heavily armed I am. By the by, have you ever heard of a glaser round? The gun doesn't have to be large to do real damage.

Disarming the populace makes it easier for criminals to do their jobs, and it makes the population wholly reliant on the government for its security. This should not be so! If Bin Laden rallied troops and marched on North Carolina, there is at least one home he would have difficulty taking: mine. He would also have difficulty taking the land of any farmer with a shotgun. If we know he's coming, everyone with a gun could meet him on the docks or wherever else he chose to make his entrance. The point being, folks, that the military does not have a patent on some miracle drug that makes a person capable of wielding a weapon! Step up to the plate for your own safety.

Finally, I would like to address the issue of gun safety. The most frequent arguments I hear against owning guns are accidental firings and your gun falling into the wrong hands. First, a gun is a tool. Cars don't kill people; people driving cars kill people. Your car is a far more dangerous weapon than your gun, yet you don't worry about it accidentally going off in the garage. That's because it requires keys and someone pressing the brake in order to start. But wait- many cars today have remote start options, so that's not even true anymore. So why do you not worry about the 6,000 pound vehicle capable of doing over 100 miles per hour and loaded with highly combustible liquid? It's sitting in your garage, just waiting for the right conditions...

You don't worry about it because it's always there. It is a tool that helps you go from point A to point B with air conditioning and a lemonade in the cup holder. The kids know the car is not a toy; you've taught them that. They don't get to play with mommy's keys; you've taught them that. You make sure the parking brake is on or that the keys are out of reach before settling in for the night. This is all just part of the daily routine.

Yet people worry that a gun sitting in a drawer will somehow go off the moment a 3-year-old walks within 5 feet. If you're familiar with guns and how they work, you know this is untrue. For those unfamiliar, I'll digress long enough to go through some basic points about gun safety. First, if the gun uses a clip, then someone must rack the slide before it will fire. I can tell you from experience that this takes far more strength than a small child possesses, even on a small-caliber weapon. Second, if the safety is on, the gun will not fire. Guns come with many different safety mechanisms. Some just have a single switch; some (like my Bersa) have a key lock, a safety switch, and a clip lock, meaning the gun won't fire without the clip, even with a round chambered. Some guns, such as my JA .22, come with a trigger lock; mine came with one that covers the entire trigger area and is difficult to disable. If you're worried, use the safeties. In our house, we don't have children and want our weapons to be ready when needed. When children stay with us, the first safety we use is height. Guns on top of bookcases and such are much harder to reach, especially when you're only 3' tall. Finally, guns without bullets are harmless. If you have small children who can get into the guns, make sure they can't get into the ammo.

More important than all of this, though, is to know how to use the weapon. If you learn about guns and you teach your children how to handle them respectfully, you have introduced an extremely helpful tool into the household. I fully intend for my children, as teenagers, to be able to defend their home, even as I pray they will never have to do so.

Why this rant? Why do I carry on so about guns and their usefulness? An armed public is a scary thing to a government. It is then a public who can stand up to the armies of the institution and say, "NO! We will not allow this!" It is a public who does not rely on the police and military to defend it, which often cannot arrive in time to avoid real harm. Ask the old man whom my fiancé saved from losing his car and possibly his life by interrupting a car-jacking. The police took several minutes to arrive, but because the event took place in front of my concealed-carrying sweetheart, he was able to stop the thief before he could beat up the elderly driver and take the car (without firing a single shot, I might add).
A well-armed public can defend itself against threats, both foreign and domestic, as our forefathers intended. We hold the keys to our own security, and we should no longer rely on the government to protect us. If we do, we are trusting that we will never need protection from our government, which history teaches us is naive.
Until tomorrow,
MK