Total Pageviews

Tuesday, January 19, 2016


For the longest time I have been perplexed about why there is any kind of controversy about the Second Amendment.  First, here it is:

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. 

The Gun Lobby, most conservatives, much of the Republican Party and no doubt criminals invoke this civil right to own guns.  Let me attempt to simplify the matter:
  • When this amendment was created:
    • the military and citizens owned muskets
    • lawmakers were fearful of a new government
    • there was no organized police network
    • there remained the danger of the British
    • there were Indians
  • If I lived then I would own a musket.
But times have changed!  A well regulated Militia armed with pistols and even assault rifles would not stand a chance against our Department of Defense equipped with tanks, F-35s, aircraft carriers, nuclear missiles and the like.  The argument that you can't trust the government so you need guns to neutralize them is absurd.

Also, the more gun ownership, the higher the rate of gun deaths:

The following make sense to me:
  • Allow citizens to own guns for hunting and the like, but each weapon needs to have a registered number.
  • Automatic rifles, grenades, mortars and similar higher order weapons should not be allowed, period.  Why would you need any of this because local militia are obsolete.
  • Anyone who legally owns a gun is liable if that weapon kills anyone, so you need to find a way to keep it absolutely safe.
    • Report immediately if found missing.
    • If you informed your child or friend on how to unlock a safe or whatever to gain access, and that person steals the weapon and kills someone, you will be equally guilty and should suffer the same consequences.
    • If there is any unstable person in the family, don't own a gun.
    • Smart guns will solve this problem.  However, they cost too much today.
  • If a criminal ever uses a gun (even without killing anyone), is arrested and convicted, the death penalty is automatic.  Draconian, but a heck of a good way to reduce this element.
What do we do with the 300 million firearms currently owned by around 40% of Americans?  Re-register them.  By the way, we own a lot more guns/capita than any other country, by far:
Serbian gun ownership is a leftover product of all their recent wars.  In Yemen, weapons, which began with daggers, is a relic of culture, where they are symbolic of manhood, power, pride, virility and strength.  There, the tribal laws (the equivalent of local militias) hold more weight than federal power.  Yemen is also in a state of war, and who knows who really is in control.

Hmmm...turns out that only 2% own them as a Constitutional right, half the percentage compared to 1999.

The National Rifle Association  (NRA) is at the forefront against gun control.  Here is what we think about them (DK means did not respond)

77% of liberal Democrats feel the NRA has too much influence, while 15% of conservative Republicans agree.

So to summarize:
  • Sure, allow citizens who want firearms to own them, properly registered.  
  • Whether it's hunting, security, symbol of power or whatever, with ownership should come responsibility and liability.  Smart guns are gaining popularity, and could well make this a non-issue.
  • The notion of owning weapons in the U.S. to neutralize your central government is nonsense today. 
As the Second Amendment is obsolete (here is a legal analysis), it should be repealed.  Will this happen?  Of course not.  There is the NRA.

Tropical Cyclone Victor at 90 MPH is weakening, turning southwest and will miss Tonga:


No comments: