Day 984 Let Freedom Ring
Monday September 16, 2019
415 Days until the 2020 election and 497 days until the Inauguration
Okay so there’s been some really weird stuff going on, and by that I mean the same old BS, that from time to time I must call out.
In the last Dem debate Beto said that he would make it mandatory for people to give up their weapons of war, their AK-47s and AR-15s. Weapons that have no purpose other than to kill people. He said he’s had enough, as have over 90% of people in America. This prompted all sorts of outrage by the gun nuts. “An AR-15 is not a real weapon of war,” was one typical comment. Then a rather milk toasty looking guy (state rep in Texas maybe?) said something like, “Beto, just try and take my AR-15 and I’ll show you.” To which Beto responded, “Sounds like you are threatening me.” Oh boy, then the gun nuts teamed up with the semi-puffed up Constitutional scholars to say not only was Beto trying to take away their 2nd amendment rights but their first amendment rights as well. I made a comment about all this on facebook to which a woman came back with the “you don’t seem to know much about history…” comment, suggesting that I didn’t know what the purpose of the second amendment is or was.
So I think it’s time for a little school house rock, (paper, scissors, gun). Okay? Okay!
The purpose of the Second Amendment was so that southern slave owners could pursue runaway slaves. Period.
I know. I know. “The right to bear arms” and “State militias” blah blah blah. The argument used to be made that the amendment was so that a person in a militia had the right to take their musket off the wall over their fireplace and assemble with their other minute men and not have their said musket taken away by the Federalis. Although this kind of thing was discussed, as were being allowed to keep guns for hunting, as French law at the time allowed, it was not the reason for the amendment. Wording was argued over and no agreement could be reached so they went with the more anodyne wording that we now have. There was talk of including something about the military use, but consensus could not be reached. The main concern of the southern representatives was that a federal armed force could come into their state and take away the guns of the plantation owners. Hence, the idea of state militias. There was a lot of wording as to who was in charge of what. The states had the militias but the federal government had the leadership of the militias.
None of this was a really big deal until guns were started to be manufactured with interchangeable parts. This in the latter late half of the 19th century. Remember during the Civil War much of the weaponry were unrifled arms with three parts to the shot: a charge, a wad, and a ball. Grant had said a man could stand 300 yards away (or was it 100?) and someone could shoot at him all day with such a weapon and never get hit. The marksmen at Gettysburg had rifled weapons but that was about it.
Okay, so after the Civil War, when the wild west was being settled, interchangeable parts started coming on the scene and this meant more guns per capita. Gun manufacturers at the time seized on the 2nd amendment as the idea that they had a right to arm everyone. They haven’t let go of that idea. This was never the idea, nor the intention of the founding fathers. In fact, in the south, only white men were allowed to have guns. Not women, or children, and lord almighty not them you know.
And let’s not forget the shootout at the OK Corral. That was a sheriff imposing the law with his brand of gun nut, telling them that you were not allowed to bring your guns into town. For some reason the NRA, Congress, and the Supreme Court don’t allow guns. I wonder why? I mean a guy in the gallery of Congress with an AK-47 could only mow down those Congressional people on the floor at the time and they’re aren’t that many on the floor at any one time so what’s the big deal? Does Wayne La Pierre fear his own members so much that he won’t let them carry guns into their meetings? Come on, if you’re going to talk the talk, walk the walk.
The idea that individuals could have a gun was rejected over and over again by the Supreme Court. Six times, I think, until Scalia came up with a “novel” interpretation (that means “wild ass”) way to interpret the 2nd amendment. In the DC gun law case known as the Heller ruling, Scalia wrote that why yes individuals could own guns and keep them in their home and that the idea of home extended to the glovebox of your car. (I mean who wants to run all the way to your house when you are pissed off and want to shoot someone?) The 2nd amendment has a clause up in the front that says why they are writing the second part (the second part being “the right to bear arms shall not be infringed.”) Scalia in a novel understanding of grammar said that just because there’s a clause up front explaining exactly what the follow on clause is for doesn’t mean that’s the only reason for the second clause. For a guy who claimed to be an originalist (ie that he was trying to understand the original meaning that the founding fathers had and cleave to it) this is an original interpretation. And to be clear, by original I mean, ain’t no way this is what the founding fathers intended.
So now let’s return to Beto and his statement and his follow up to the Texas gun nut politician.
1 – Is it okay, ie legal, to write a law making a certain kind of weapon illegal for the general public to have? Is it constitutional?
Answer – Hell yes. After the Valentine’s Day massacre in 1934 Congress passed a National firearms act limiting the ownership of machine guns and requiring them to be registered and a tax (a heavy tax) be paid. This is pretty much what we have today, In the 1960s the gun lobby managed to gut a lot of that law but machine guns are registered and ownership is therefore tightly controlled and such weapons have not been used in mass shooting since that time. So yeah, you can limit the use of a firearm.
In 1994 an assault weapons ban went into effect with a ten year sunset provision. There were constitutional lawsuits filed, all were rejected. According to Wikipedia the overall criminal activity did not seem to be effected but there is tentative evidence that the number of mass shooting went down. The law expired in 2004. Since then the number of mass shooting has sky rocketed.
So there’s all this talk by the gun nuts about their right to bear arms and not have it infringed. How about my right to not be in fear of being gunned down when I go to the movies, school, the mall, a street, or anywhere in America? No place is safe. What about my self evident truth that I have a right to pursue happiness? It’s kind of hard to do when you aren’t sure if a gun nut is stalking you or the place you frequent.
Certain rights have limitations. If you yell “FIRE!” in a crowded theater and there isn’t one, you can be arrested. If I walk into a McDonald’s and someone is standing there with a weapon that they could unleash 100 bullets in seven seconds what am I supposed to do? Calmly go up to the counter and order a burger?
I remember playing paintball with my son. They made a big deal about wearing eye protection and keeping your marker gun barrel corked when the game was over. When all the markers were supposed to be capped I walked by a kid with an uncorked barrel. I looked at him and he said, “Don’t worry, It’s not loaded.” Screw you kid. I am worried.
Remember Bruce Lee’s son, Brandon? He was in a movie “The Crow.” There was a scene with a gun. The gun wasn’t loaded, but there was a bullet in the cylinder so that the camera could make it look like it was loaded. The firearms specialist had gone home for the day. It was a throw away scene, finishing up for the day. There was powder or something in the gun so when the trigger was pulled it would make a loud sound. Bang. Projectile. He’s dead. It was an accident. Everyone is sorry. Screw you.
(In fairness, the story has been updated. Brandon was holding a grocery bag and when the gun was fired Brandon was supposed to toggle something that made an explosion inside the grocery bag. It’s not clear whether the projectile was from the grocery bag or the gun. This was not the story at the time. However, Brandon suffered a hole in his body the size of a silver dollar and two arteries were cut.)
At least Brandon had a chance. From what I’ve read about the ammo used in AR-15s and the like, the victim’s body and internal organs are reduced to hash. But that’s okay the gun nuts say because an AR-15 isn’t a real military weapon. Screw you.
I want to be free in my country and I that includes the freedom to walk down a street, go to a movie, enter a mall or school and not have to worry if this is going to be the day some nut decides to pop off.
So please. No more talk about your rights to own weapons designed for hunting and killing humans. Stop whining about your constitutional right to whatever. I say a person’s right to safety and happiness trumps your fear or whatever it is that makes you want to own an AR-15 or the like.
415 Days until the 2020 election and 497 days until the Inauguration
PS Yeah, it’s you honey. For sure.
Leave a Reply