Even More Second Amendment Discussion

Life is full of surprises.

Last week I posted two entries on my blog.  One was an examination of how psychology, in this case uncertainty vs certainty, effects our economy.  I was very happy with its content and expression and thought it might generate some interactions.  The other was a brief wrap up of my reaction to my local borough council's consideration of passing a resolution supporting the second amendment.  I had posted my gut reaction at the local newspaper's comments area then, after checking if my comment had inspired any feedback, responded in kind to one particular reader's reaction to my words. 

So, what is the surprise?  The post about uncertainty, as of this moment, has generated 7 hits.  The one with my second amendment comments has generated 1832 hits!  Even more amazing, over 1100 of those hits have come from Poland!

Clearly, I cannot imagine that 1100 random Poles have discovered my blog.  My assumption is that one or two individuals have shared my thoughts with their friends.  To them I say, thanks, and if you would like to converse with me directly, feel free to email me at

jpugnetti@hotmail.com

Now, back to the discussion.

To my utmost disappointment, the United States Senate failed to pass any meaningful new gun control legislation.  In the name of "...the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed" our legislators decided that protection of the American citizenry from assault weapons and multi-clip magazines, and from the inconvenience of a background check before buying a gun, was less important than a perceived erosion of the second amendment.  I say perceived because there were no proposals which banned everyday American citizens from owning a gun for self-defense or  recreation, just a suggestion that certain guns, whose only purpose is to kill multiple people quickly be banned.  And that perhaps if we had a more universal background check, we may keep guns from those who have already committed a crime or who been deemed mentally unstable.  Common sense restrictions which equate the ability to kill multiple people quickly as a danger to society and therefore place assault weapons and multi-clip magazines in the same category as tanks, bazookas and flame throwers.

Of course, the elephant in the room is the fact that Americans are a violent people.  We rank first, by a large margin in guns owned per person (over 80 guns per 100 people), and very high in homicide rates.  Violence is not just a byproduct of our right to bear arms, but a culturally accepted means to a variety of ends, whether that end be taking something without earning it, keeping what is mine, or convincing another country than our way of life is best.

We abhor those countries that sponsor terrorism, as well as we should, but then lead the world in producing weapons.  We are a self proclaimed Christian nation that has seen the sales of guns skyrocket with the election of our first black president, along with the profits for gun manufacturers. 

And then there is the Boston Marathon bombing.  Within minutes, men and women, both civilian and police, did everything they could do to move victims to safety and protect those not injured.  Then, through an amazingly coordinated effort by federal, state and local police, one of the bombers is killed and the other is captured.  All across America, people stand and cheer, tears streaming for the victims, for justice being swift in the capture of the villains, and for the men and women in uniform who lived up to the motto of to protect and serve.

Funny, that all those people who are afraid of the government, who fear gun legislation in the belief that they may need their assault weapons in case the government comes to take their guns, funny that those obsessed with their right to keep and bear arms will be shooting the very same people they are cheering today, their local police, national guardsmen, FBI agents, etc, when we need to violently wrest our freedoms back from the government. 

Amendment II

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.

I believe I saw the "well regulated militia" in the form of our local, state and federal police in action in the events of the Boston Marathon bombing.   I believe the security of the free state, in this case, the United States of America, is what shall not and must not be infringed. 

I don't believe our right to bear arms assumes the right to be able to massacre fellow American citizens via assault weapons and multi-clip magazines.