Skip to main content
  1. News
  2. Politics
  3. Policy & Issues

Editorial: A pragmatic look at gun control

See also

Brace yourselves. Nobody is coming to take your guns and weapons. The National Rifle Association, which lays its roots as an off-shoot of a faction of the Ku Klux Klan, wanted you to think so, didn’t they? That’s what every news “entertainer” on Fox News said (Entertainers and journalists are two different things so it is important to distinguish the two). That’s what Alex Jones said. In fact, no piece of federal legislation was ever presented in regards to gun restriction in Washington, DC under President Obama that limited gun ownership. The two laws that President Obama did in fact sign, expanded the rights of gun ownership. The first one, in February 2012, allowed gun owners to now carry weapons into national parks, which overturned a Ronald Reagan-signed law that required weapons to be locked in trunks of cars or glove compartments for the duration of a stay in a national park. The other gun law signed by President Obama overturned a George W. Bush initiative put forth in 2001 that made it illegal for Amtrak passengers to have guns in their checked baggage. So when you are packing heat in Yellowstone or locked and loaded on your train headed into Penn Station, you can thank President Obama for making that perfectly legal.

A discussion was held to see if they ever wanted to consider talking about gun restriction, and was quickly pushed under the rug. Gun manufacturers and re-sellers really want you to think that the 2nd Amendment is being revoked. It is working isn’t it? The first day after the tragic school shooting in Newtown, CT in December 2012 gun sales spiked 60% nationwide. If you live in a state where gun ownership and product features such as clip sizes may have been limited, the federal government has nothing to do with that. That’s your local state government at work, not “Obama taking your guns away.” President Obama’s only action in response to the Newtown, Connecticut tragedy was the executive order requiring background checks to be mandatory.

Let’s take a look at the history of the right to bear arms. The 2nd Amendment was ratified on December 17, 1791 along with 9 other Amendments that made up the Bill of Rights. It reads as follows: “A well regulated militia, being necessary for the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” This was based on the English Bill of Rights from 1689. The English Bill of Rights considered arms an auxiliary right, supporting the natural rights of self-defense, resistance to oppression, and the civic duty to act in concert in defense of the State. It’s pretty much the same thing with different verbiage. In a case in 1876, the United States Supreme Court addressed the 2nd Amendment as follows: “The right to bear arms is not granted by the Constitution; neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence.” In laymen’s terms, this limited the applicability of the 2nd Amendment to the Federal Government. In 1939, the Supreme Court again in a new case, re-examined the 2nd Amendment, but this time in more detail. They said “The Federal Government and the States could limit any weapon types not having a reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia.” Ahh, see the issue there? Define the word “reasonable” in that sentence? You can’t. It’s like defining the word “decency.” Every single person is going to have their own definition.

The 2nd Amendment could simply be updated, but certainly should not be removed. What I mean by “updated” is update it with common sense language because we as Americans apparently don’t have enough common sense to interpret it. It has to be more specific for our times. The word “Arms” could literally mean any weapon. So by that logic I am entitled to own a nuclear weapon. But, of course I have common sense and know that is a terrible idea to pursue and never would, but to put it quite simply-some people just aren’t that bright. The 14th Amendment of 1868, ratified in response to the aftermath of the Civil War, guaranteed equal protection of the laws and citizenship rights, also protected the rights laid forth in the 2nd Amendment, according to the Supreme Court in both 2008 and 2010. So there isn’t actually an issue here. The media, on both sides of political ideologies, preys on the under-informed masses to keep them emotionally stirred up about absolutely nothing. Fox News goes as far a putting a face on it, which happens to unfairly be President Obama because he is an easy target because believe it or not ignorant things like racism are alive and well in the United States. There is a lot of money to be made to keep everyone fired up over guns and gun control, and the American public is playing right into the psychological manipulation. I’m sure there is someone reading this getting very emotional and their face is getting red like a “Looney Tunes” character. It's OK. Breathe. Do you feel lied to? I’m sure there are some people who definitely feel that history never happened, President Obama actually invented evil, and the boogey man is definitely coming for your guns regardless of what “based in reality” facts exist in the world. These are the same people that support political ideologies that in no way support their own way of life or the sustainability of their family’s well-being. And that’s pretty comical. Thanks for the entertainment. So what’s the real problem here?

This may seem a little radical but stick with me. A background check shouldn’t be searching only for criminal records, they should be searching to see if the person buying the gun is a person that is a virgin and has no shot of ever getting a date. Do you know what every psycho has in common? Girl problems. Americans are raised to think they are exceptional in every way and can achieve anything. Although it is great to dream, set personal goals, and work toward something, there are people out there that are really really angry when they come to the reality that we aren’t exceptional and things don’t just “happen.” And that is really frustrating. It’s makes people angry. Some people take out that frustration in constructive ways by creating art. Some people take out that frustration by going into debt for a sports car. Quite simply, that person who has bad luck with women usually goes in very specific routes with their lives. Some join death metal bands to get the attention of women by screaming and snarling into a microphone to sound like a tough alpha male. Some people become rappers and play “gangsta” to get the attention of women. Some just give up and play video games and watch a lot of internet pornography. In Darwin’s world, the survival of the fittest means the weaker are eliminated. That’s true for animals, but with humans the weaker aren’t eliminated. In the human order, the weaker have the ability to fight back. So, unfortunately, others assert their manhood by killing people. The psychology is simpler than people want to admit to themselves. No matter how silly it may seem, there is only one universal reason that a man ever gets out of bed or for that matter ever leaves the house. That reason is women.

Advertisement