Why is there a need… to own a gun?

Hi Bob, Read your recent Alert regarding gun control & several points I’d make are:

• • Firstly, why is there a need for you or any US citizen to own a gun, let alone a high powered military type weapon? Could understand a small arm handgun, but a rapid fire automatic weapon, makes no sense!! Is life in US so insecure that people have to have to take law into their own hands??
  •  
  • Secondly, people cite the 2nd amendment of the Constitution as “right to bear arms”, but they seem to miss the point that it was written at time of conflict in US history in 18th century & only related to muskets, one shot pistols!
  •  
  • Thirdly, the issue of Guns in US is very much driven by political parties, arms manufacturers & power of the NRA gun Lobby!! They all stymie any reasonable change that makes US a far safer place to live! Sad!!
  •  
  • Finally, my country has had firearms controls since a very bad massacre of some 35 people in 1996 & Federally the laws were changed to restrict type of weapons & who can legally have certain types.
  •  
  • For instance, farmers can own automatic weapons that must be stored in a gun safe at their premises + required to register the gun/s every 12 months. Since the changes to the law, there has been only one multi killing in 22 years!

Look fwd to your response.. Regards, Ray G.

Dear Ray,

Your first “point” is in error as it presumes that Americans are easily able to legally purchase and possess “a high powered military type weapon” or “a rapid fire automatic weapon.”

That is not the case and has not been since the passage of the National Firearms Act of 1934 which imposed a tax on the making and transfer of certain weapons and a special tax on persons and entities engaged in the business of importing, manufacturing and dealing in certain firearms.

Firearms subject to the act included “shotguns and rifles having barrels less than 18 inches in length, certain firearms described as ‘any other weapons,’ machineguns (sic), and firearm mufflers and silencers.” The act was amended by the Gun Control Act of 1968 to overcome a constitutional flaw that was later discovered. In 1986, Congress passed the Firearm Owner’s Protection Act which amended the GCA to prohibit the transfer or possession of machine guns.

Exceptions were made for transfers of machine guns to, or possession of machine guns by, government agencies, and those lawfully possessed before the effective date of the prohibition, May 19, 1986.

People “need” firearms for reasons that are their own. They are suitable for recreational purposes (hunting, target shooting, etc.) and for defensive purposes. Just like there are many makes and models of automobiles, airplanes, power tools, etc., there are many makes and models of firearms.

Each has its own use and benefit for the person wielding it. What “makes no sense” to you may make perfect “sense” to someone else, so what “makes no sense” to you is irrelevant. In a free society, no individual is granted the moral authority to dictate his wishes on someone else.

You ask: “Is life in US so insecure that people have to have to take law into their own hands?” Crime is actually decreasing in the U.S. (save for last year, which saw an increase in most crimes for the first time in many years). However, here are some numbers for you:

• At the 2016 homicide rate, roughly one in every 235 Americans will be murdered in the course of their lives.
•  
• A U.S. Justice Department study based on crime data from 1974 to 1985 found that 42 percent of Americans will be the victim of a completed violent crime (assault, robbery, rape) in the course of their lives; 83 percent of Americans will be the victim of an attempted or completed violent crime; 52 percent of Americans will be the victim of an attempted or completed violent crime more than once.

Finally, your concern about “military” or “assault” weapons is misguided. According the FBI, more than twice as many people are killed by “hands and feet” as by rifles of all types; and so-called “assault weapons” are a minor subset of all rifles. Nor is there an epidemic of children getting killed in mass school shooting. There is a six times greater chance of dying from lightning strike than dying in a school shooting.

The vast majority of homicides, particularly those caused by people with guns, occur in a small handful of America’s largest cities and, by an overwhelming percentage, are a result of black-on-black crime using handguns.

There is a popular saying in America that when seconds count, police are only minutes away. Another is that I carry a gun because a police officer is too heavy. Plus, the Supreme Court has ruled that police have no obligation to protect anyone from a crime. So people are obligated to protect themselves. But that does not mean anyone advocates taking “law into their own hands.”

To your second “point:” Once again, your premise is flawed. The 2^nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution does not grant the right to keep and bear arms. That right of self-defense is inalienable. It is possessed by everyone at birth. The 2^nd Amendment – as does the rest of the Constitution – (ostensibly) binds government from infringing on that right and codifies into law that inherent right.

The 2^nd Amendment (and the other nine contained in the Bill of Rights) was added to the Constitution at the behest of a group of the Founding Fathers in order to secure ratification of the new Constitution. Without it, the new Constitution would not have been ratified by the states.

Another flaw in your premise is that the amendment’s phraseology referred to “only related to muskets, one shot pistols.” That is historically ignorant, not supported legally or rationally and is a vacuous argument. Does the 1^st Amendment only apply to words printed on parchment with quill pens; or does it also apply to words written on typewriters, computers and personal devices?

But beyond the issue of personal self-defense, gun ownership is necessary to prevent the U.S. from becoming a complete totalitarian state and enslaving and/or murdering the populace as has occurred in authoritarian regimes throughout history. The Founders recognized this:

“Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?” -Patrick Henry

“The supposed quietude of a good man allures the ruffian; while on the other hand, arms like laws discourage and keep the invader and the plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. The same balance would be preserved were all the world destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay them aside…Horrid mischief would ensue were one half the world deprived of the use of them…” -Thomas Paine

“The Constitution shall never be construed … to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms.” -Samuel Adams

“Americans have the right and advantage of being armed; unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.” –The Federalist, No. 46, James Madison

“Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people’s liberty teeth and keystone under independence … From the hour the Pilgrims landed, to the present day, events, occurrences, and tendencies prove that to insure peace, security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable . . . the very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference – they deserve a place of honor with all that is good” -George Washington

“[W]hen the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised by an artful man, –who was governor of Pennsylvania, to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them…” -George Mason, The Virginia Ratifying Convention.

Your third point is specious nonsense. The NRA (of which I am no fan), is a training organization and special interest organization supported by money (dues) from millions of gun owners. It (supposedly) represents their interests same as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce represents business interests, AARP represents senior interests and unions represent labor interests.

But as I wrote in the column you referenced, the NRA is a surrender organization that has lobbied for or granted its tacit support of every gun law ever passed in the U.S. It has already signaled its willingness to surrender on “bump stocks” and “red flag” laws. You would never hear about “the issue of Guns” if not for the politicians and globalist interests who are trying to steal our inalienable right from us.

You write: “They all stymie any reasonable change that makes US a far safer place to live! Sad!!” It is not government’s job to make the “US a far safer place to live.” And not only is it not government’s function; it is impossible for government to do so. There are thousands of local, state and federal laws and statutes that make it unlawful to commit a crime against another human. If any one of them worked or had the potential to work; life would be the utopia of which you dream. Adding one more will not make a difference.

To your fourth point: What you say is fine for Australia (which is where I presume you live based on your reference point). I have no interest in what Australia does or does not do regarding its people’s freedom beyond using it as an example of what could happen in America. If you and other Australians are content as slaves, that’s certainly your business.

But your assertion that “there has been only one multi killing in 22 years” is a baldfaced lie. Besides, you cannot compare Australia’s murder rate with that of the U.S. because Australia’s population is 7.5 percent of the U.S. population and the two nations are culturally, morally, historically and demographically dissimilar.

Best wishes,
Bob

The post Why is there a need… to own a gun? appeared first on Personal Liberty®.