bellisarius
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2017
- Posts
- 16,761
The Second Amendment is quite clear as to what it says and what it means (although there are a few who apparently are saddled with English as a second language that are determined to debate that point. The Supreme Court has ruled that the Second Amendment is an individual right (Heller v District of Columbia) not some group right. Further the court has ruled that right covers military style individual firearms (United States v Miller). The order that the Second Amendment appears in the Bill of Rights is not arbitrary. Nor is it a right given by the government. It, along with all of the amendments in the Bill of Rights are assumed to be the natural rights of man. Beyond the reach of government to grant or deny. The Second Amendment is the guarantor of all of the other rights. Taking the First Amendment as an example, look around the world. In nation after nation you find their governments placing restrictions on their freedom of speech, the religion(s) they choose to practice, and to peaceably assemble. The Second Amendment is the 'teeth' in the Constitution that acts as a brake on the governments ability to infringe on all of those other rights we take for granted.
There are those that would want to do away with the Second Amendment altogether, or severely restrict the right to exercise that right. They couch it in terms of 'Hunting', a factor that was considered by only one state when the Bill of Rights was framed (Pennsylvania), or in other equally restrictive arguments. Over the course of this nations history over one million Americans have given their lives to secure and preserve the rights in the Constitution that make the United States what it is with the liberties that we all enjoy. Those rights are NOT going to be surrendered willingly or without bloodshed no matter what fantasies you may cleave to. The "Gun Control" crowd have willfully ignored the fact that in each and everyone of these recent school shootings multiple laws were broken BEFORE the first life was taken, yet some how they are of the belief that even more laws will 'fix' the problem. The only thing that onerous laws will accomplish is the criminalizing of what are now law abiding citizens, the creation of new black markets, and the fomenting of civil insurrection. In other words they'll have worsened the problem.
The willful taking of a life is murder. The age of the victim is immaterial. A life is a life no matter how it ends and although senseless murders are seemingly the worst of all, it is only the living that are burdened with the problem of trying to make sense of that which makes no sense at all. The firearm used in these senseless murders is merely a tool, an implement. And these murderers are merely the wielder of those tools. Those that are determined to embark on indiscriminate carnage will find a way, and a tool, to do so. These acts of indiscriminate murder are symptoms of a societal problem, a problem that the mere removal of a tool is NOT going to solve..........or even address. As far as I'm concerned anyone that commits murder, and especially indiscriminate murder, is insane. Not even up for debate in my mind. But what drove them to that madness? With rare exception people are not born insane. What are the cues? How to intervene before that individual is too far gone? And when we find the answer to those questions we have to address how we're going to go about dealing with those problems without trampling on the rights of the lawful. We'll find none of those answers in the banning of a tool.
There are those that would want to do away with the Second Amendment altogether, or severely restrict the right to exercise that right. They couch it in terms of 'Hunting', a factor that was considered by only one state when the Bill of Rights was framed (Pennsylvania), or in other equally restrictive arguments. Over the course of this nations history over one million Americans have given their lives to secure and preserve the rights in the Constitution that make the United States what it is with the liberties that we all enjoy. Those rights are NOT going to be surrendered willingly or without bloodshed no matter what fantasies you may cleave to. The "Gun Control" crowd have willfully ignored the fact that in each and everyone of these recent school shootings multiple laws were broken BEFORE the first life was taken, yet some how they are of the belief that even more laws will 'fix' the problem. The only thing that onerous laws will accomplish is the criminalizing of what are now law abiding citizens, the creation of new black markets, and the fomenting of civil insurrection. In other words they'll have worsened the problem.
The willful taking of a life is murder. The age of the victim is immaterial. A life is a life no matter how it ends and although senseless murders are seemingly the worst of all, it is only the living that are burdened with the problem of trying to make sense of that which makes no sense at all. The firearm used in these senseless murders is merely a tool, an implement. And these murderers are merely the wielder of those tools. Those that are determined to embark on indiscriminate carnage will find a way, and a tool, to do so. These acts of indiscriminate murder are symptoms of a societal problem, a problem that the mere removal of a tool is NOT going to solve..........or even address. As far as I'm concerned anyone that commits murder, and especially indiscriminate murder, is insane. Not even up for debate in my mind. But what drove them to that madness? With rare exception people are not born insane. What are the cues? How to intervene before that individual is too far gone? And when we find the answer to those questions we have to address how we're going to go about dealing with those problems without trampling on the rights of the lawful. We'll find none of those answers in the banning of a tool.