We are currently in what is my least favorite time of every olympiad: the presidential and other other major election times.
Time for attack ads, mostly untrue, unkeepable promises, and out and out lies. Little actual information.
Recently we in the Red River Valley had a supposed treat: a visit from Sarah Pahlin’s husband, who, of course wasn’t really doing any campaigning, but he did want us all to know how much of a “Constitutionalists” he is. He’s referring, of course, to the supposed second amendment right to bear arms, which many would have us believe the constitution guarantees each and every one of us. The only problem with Mr. Pahlin and the like is that they never tell us what the second amendment actually says. They speak of something like “right to bear arms,” likely never saying the same thing twice and let it go at that.
For the record: “A well organized and disciplined militia being essential for the national defense, the right of The People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”
Now, I am not arguing for gun control, I’m just examining some people’s political position. Note a few items of interest in the above: 1) The second amendment is about a militia. Does Mr. Pahlin have trouble joining the Alaska National Guard? 2) The amendment mentions the People, as in “We the People” or the “right of the People to peacably assemble(in the first amendment)”; 3) there is no mention of firearms.
Now, I am not taking a position on individuals owning firearms: it is unlikely that any jurisdiction in North Dakota would pass a law outlawing such. It is true that according to several statistical studies the moment we obtain a gun for our own protection, the chances of our being killed or injured in a violent incident is increased. The reason is simple: people that commit such acts, according to the TV show “Evil” have brains that work differently than normal people, and the don’t view us as people, but rather objects. But I digress.
Recently, the US Supreme court(a body which almost eight years ago I lost all respect for) struck down a Washington DC law that forbade the owning of sidearms. They specifically did not strike down all such laws as unconstitutional. But, for the sake of argument. lets assume they had. Then I want to know if the second amendment guarantees me the the right to keep nuclear hand grenades in my house.
Obviously this last would be absurd, but how to we make such determinations? Well, maybe we should look at the writings of the people who wrote the constitution. I’ve done that, but it was a long time ago. Seems to me that the reason for the second amendment is to keep the government from hiring a private army, which they started doing in the late 60′s during the Viet Nam era.
The point of all this: don’t believe politicians: I have two letters in my files from then Senator Mark Andrews, one saying the second amendment guarantees me the right to own a gun. and another saying it doesn’t.