Noël Lynne Figart

Home  |  Articles  |  About Me  |  Poetry  |  Short stories  |  Contact Me  |  Pattern Drafting  |  blog.html

Shooting Down Gun Control

"If a politician isn't perfectly comfortable with the idea of his average constituent, any man, woman, or responsible child, walking into a hardware store and paying cash -- for any rifle, shotgun, handgun, machine gun, anything -- without producing ID or signing one scrap of paper, he isn't your friend no matter what he tells you."

L.  Neil Smith -- Why Guns?

There is no question more closely tied to the issue of civil rights than gun control.  Oneis other civil rights mean nothing without the means to defend them.

Gun Control is a hot button issue.  Guns are scary tools.  Guns should be scary tools.  Guns are specifically designed to kill as efficiently as possible. The concern about irrevocably taking a human life is very valid.  At least in theory, the gun control issue, however, should have been settled in 1789, when the Bill of Rights was passed.

Although the Second Amendment is quoted often enough in this debate, it is likely that this essay will burst into flames if it is not quoted again herein:

"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."

In this argument, the definition of militia becomes vital.  In researching the issue, note that many politicians of the day, including Richard Henry Lee, George Mason, Thomas Jefferson and Patrick Henry, defined militia as any able bodied man over the age of 17.  They make it very clear that they did not mean professional soldiers.  Even the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Virginia makes note of this:

"That a well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state, therefore, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty; and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power."

-- Article 1, Section 13.

The people of the United States were afraid of a standing army at the command of a legitimate authority.  Their very own legal, legitimate government had just used a powerful and well-trained standing army to enforce the tax code and use their barns.  (Contrary to popular belief, the Third Amendment forbidding the forced quartering of military personnel in peacetime came about not because too many farmersi daughters were raped by British soldiers, but because when Bossy was disturbed in the barn by soldiers sleeping there, she didnit give so much milk).  We won by an Irish miracle and General Lafayette.

After the dust settled and our founding fathers were trying to decide on a form of government, nearly all agreed that it would be a good idea for the population to keep its high-tech weapons in case another dictator got too big for his britches.  High-tech weapons? Yes.  The Colonists won their freedom at least in part because they were better armed than the British.  One of the major industries of the Colonies, and later the United States, was the manufacture of guns.  The people of the colonies could afford better weapons individually than the British Crown could afford for its soldiers.  

The right to bear arms was meant as a limitation on government abuses of power by a people who had been through such abuses.  The right to bear arms was not intended to help settlers hunt n that men would hunt for food was taken as a given.  It was not intended to protect the homes of the settlers.  It was intended to put a stranglehold on the workings of the government.

So, how did the United States, a people afraid of the potential abuses of government, come to accept, and even demand, laws restricting the ownership of guns?

The simple answer is fear.  Ironically, most gun control legislation was enacted as an attempt to try to correct problems caused by other prohibitive legislation.  The classic example of this was, of course, the Eighteenth Amendment which prohibited the manufacture and sale of alcohol in the United States.  This legislation had the side effect of an extraordinary rise in the murder rate, as well as problems with theft.  People were quite reasonably afraid of gangsters and their tommy guns.  However, these gangsters were already breaking laws.