Part 2 – The Second Amendment

I published Part 1 of this article just after I finished running off a copy on my printer. I don’t believe the ink was even dry on the copy when I receive a couple of replies on Veterans Today, lambasting me on what I had written and stating in no uncertain terms that VT should no longer publish my work. Isn’t it interesting that even with the First Amendment guaranteeing our right to free speech, backed-up by the Second Amendment giving we the people the ability to enforce the U.S. Constitution by force if necessary, that we have those who would deny a person to write about what’s on his mind. Now that’s priceless!

In response to the replies I wrote that they should withhold judgment until the article was complete with all parts being published. I further stated I had been writing for VT for a period of time and that it is an open forum where freedom of discussion was encouraged. Out of a readership numbering in the hundreds of thousands, plus being accessed globally, I always expect to hear from those with differing opinion, yet have never called for their voices to be silenced. That is one of the principles of the First Amendment (freedom of speech), that those of us who served in the military should be amply aware.

Redressing those who believe only their views should be heard and all others be denied a platform to free speechvoice their opinions, is exactly why we should be thankful for the Second Amendment, because an unarmed citizenry has no protection against a government who would enforce censorship on its people.

That being said, our readers would be interested in focusing on some real numbers regarding global homicide and crime rates and just where the U.S. fits into picture. We’ll compare the relative rate of gun homicides to homicides by other means, and look at other crime issues to see just how well “gun confiscation” has worked in making other countries of the world safer places to live. After all, this is the remedy the Left has been and will continue to try to force down our throats or up our flues, in defiance of the Second Amendment, as they have been trying to do with our other natural rights outlined in the U.S. Constitution.

Most people of liberal-progressive persuasion really do believe they know what is the best for everyone, and that those old Neanderthals – The Founding Fathers – were nothing but a bunch of racist, homophobes, bigots, and extremists. Without ever having read the Federalist Papers to understand the brilliance of these early American thinkers, they all seem to follow a line of thinking that would be indicative of the mind of an individual with an IQ barely north of the single digit category. In the end, when you see the results of the arguments they present and really look at the facts, I believe most American citizens are intelligent enough to draw their own conclusion and bet it will be far different than those who “want to protect us from cradle to grave”.

Assumption Number One of those on the left: The creation of laws, rules, and government regulations will give society its ultimate protection from people who would commit crime with handguns.

From Cornell University School of Law: ” A “crime” is any act or omission (of an act) in violation of a public law forbidding or commanding it. Though there are some common law crimes, most crimes in the United States are established by local, state, and federal governments. Criminal laws vary significantly from state to state”. We can find a law that may be used to allow or prohibit every element of human behavior. Just how many laws are there on the books of federal, state, and local entities, according to Paul Rosenzweig, in “The History of Criminal Law,” at 129 & n.4, in Paul Rosenzweig & Brian Walsh, eds., One Nation Under Arrest: How Crazy Laws, Rogue Prosecutors and Activist Judges Threaten Your Liberty (Heritage Foundation 2010), “one could not count them all with any degree of certainty”.

John S. Baker Jr., in Revisiting the Explosive Growth of Federal Crimes, Legal Memorandum No. 26 (Heritage Foundation, June 2008), stated that “the best recent estimate is that there are more than 4,500 criminal offenses contained in federal statutes—and even this estimate is already a half-decade old, however, all we know for sure is that the number of crimes grows every year”.

Observed from just random samplings of sarcastic comments made by John Q. Public on numerous Internet websites in regards to the laws that govern us here in America . . .

“Yep, what we need is more laws and the government to protect us”. Grandaddy Biker

” Yes, what we need is more laws, more laws, more laws. When something ain’t working the government will fix it. More government, more government, and more government.” J.R. Bogie

All told there are probably a million or more laws within the jurisdiction of state and local governing bodies to go along with the federal statutes contained in all 51 Titles of the U.S. Code making it effectively impossible for an average citizen to find them all.

Additionally, John C. Coffee Jr., from his Reflections on the Disappearing Tort/Crime Distinction in pinoccio-obama-gunsAmerican Law, 71 B.U. L. Rev. 193, 216 (1991), asks the question, “Does ‘Unlawful’ mean ‘Criminal’? Often, a federal statute criminalizes violations of any requirements contained in agency regulations, and nobody has any idea how many regulations are subject to criminal enforcement. As an expert on the subject he further stated that Columbia Law School has estimated that there are more than 300,000 separate federal regulations that might be the basis for a criminal prosecution.

With all these laws designed to give us the ultimate protection, why is it then I don’t feel any safer? Maybe we can attribute the fact that we don’t feel safer because criminals do not obey the laws, or that the world is full of “crazies”, who can meet the courts’ burden of insanity . . . but then again, don’t worry about that either because there is, a Model Penal Code – MPC (legal standard for insanity), “which serves as a good starting place to gain an understanding of the basic structure of criminal liability“. . . in other words, don’t worry about it, the poor criminal was a victim of something that made him go insane. In that case you will probably be the one who gets the blame when his tries to kill or rape a member of your family.

Assumption Number Two of those on the Left: Keeping guns locked up in one place and the ammunition in another location is the only way to insure safe handling of guns in the home.

Any unloaded gun, whether pistol, rifle, or shotgun, doesn’t provide much family protection when it is unloaded, unless of course, you want to club the intruder to death and can get “the drop on him”. If a gun owner has no interest in using his firearm for protection of his family from a potentially armed intruder, then perhaps it might make sense to follow such a practice, however, I do not know anyone of sound mind that owns a gun, who would not want to use it to protect his/her family if such an occasion arose.

Keeping guns in one part of the home and ammo in another would be like keeping your car in the garage empty and storing the gasoline outside or in another building.  It would get old quickly to pour gas in your car every time you wanted to run to the store.

With guns however, you would probably be dead before being able to fetch the ammunition and get it loaded. The likelihood of you or your loved ones having your names on top of a police homicide case file would probably be even further increased if you had to hunt around for the key to a trigger-lock device before you could fire the weapon, even after you got the gun loaded.

According to San Francisco based, Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, a liberal organization that would just as soon wipe the Second Amendment off the books without the due process of the Congressional Amendment process, they state, “a 2005 study on adult firearm storage practices in U.S. homes found that over 1.69 million children and youth under age 18 are living in homes with loaded and unlocked firearms. In addition, 73% of children under age 10 living in homes with guns reported knowing the location of their parents’ firearms”. Such figures are often used by liberals to infer gun owners are purposely negligent when it comes to their gun ownership, when the exact opposite is more than likely the truth.

Responsible gun owners teach their children gun safety. They teach them how to care for their guns and how to shoot correctly and more often than not, instruct them in hunting from a very early age. Maybe in the liberal bastions of California a gun owner would willfully disregard such common sense gun handling education, but as a rule across the country, I don’t believe that is the norm for gun owners. I can only image that liberal gun owners out there would ignore whatever laws they want to write, just like they disregard immigration laws that allow places like San Francisco to become sanctuary cities which harbor illegal immigrant felons.

There are many assumptions made by those who oppose personal gun ownership in America, and in Part three we will get to more of them. In closing Part 2, however, I will leave you with a few figures to reflect upon, and then go into more detail in Part 3.

The facts about gun ownership speak for themselves. The U.S. is in first place of gun ownership around the world with an estimated 90 guns/100 population, and because of such high rate of gun ownership is probably the reason we are well behind England and the NATO countries in overall violent crime!

  • The number one murder capital is Honduras with 90 murders/100K population.
  • 110 countries, most with socialist governments and restrictions on gun ownership, lead the US in murders per 100K citizens.
  • The US ranks 111 on the global list of gun murders/100K population.

It is hard to escape the “facts and figures” thrown around by the liberal progressives, who still choose to live in the U.S. despite the fact that they continue to belittle the country and tell us just how bad living here really is. To those of us who view the country from a conservative prospective, they tell us we are just too dumb to realize how bad we have it. Case in Point . . . Since England has effectively taken guns away from the citizens, accordingly life should be so much better as far as crime goes. BUT this isn’t what the facts really say:

Total crimes per 1000/population (based on decade old figures available)

England is ranked 4th in violent crime per 1000 population   109.96/K

NATO Countries average       50.53/K

United States                            41.29/K

Denmark the country Bernie Sanders says, “we can learned a lot from Denmark” –  91.34/K.

Since that is a Democrat’s view of a country we can learn from, though Bernie is really a declared Marxist Socialist running for president as a Democrat, I believe I will take a pass on Bernie’s model of excellence for America.


Follow this blog

Get every new post delivered right to your inbox.

Email address