The second amendment is specifically worded and phrased to protect the right of the people to have the ability to resist a tyrannical state. It reads:
“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.”
By a well-regulated militia, it refers to the armed forces which the government may use for our defense. It does not mean armed groups of citizens- it means the national military. Because the state controls that militia- it stands to reason that it can be misused and turned against the people.
To put it into more common terms, the second amendment says; ‘Because the government needs a military, the people have a right to be armed in case SHTF.’
The purpose of the amendment is to protect the right of the people to possess arms capable of putting up resistance against the army should tyrannical entities obtain the power of the government. The second amendment is not about your right to hunt for food. Neither is it about your right to protect yourself from common criminals. It is about stopping a tyrannical government by using force of arms.
In other words, the second amendment is about technology.
The founding fathers were brilliant, but they did not seem to realize that in just a couple hundred years we would have guns that would enable today’s shooter to take out a whole platoon of their soldiers. And they certainly did not think that we would have a military capable of wiping out whole small towns in a few moments.
Their intention was to give you, the common citizen, the ability to defend your family should the government wrongfully and illegally send armed men to violate your rights. It was something they themselves saw personally under the rule of the English monarchy.
So, unlike most Americans today, the founders knew that a tyrannical government was not only very possible- but probable- and given enough time, inevitable. Failing to legislate against a danger that they rightly saw as probable and inevitable would have made them pretty crappy founders.
Now, this brings us up to the present, when we have already forbidden the common, law-abiding person from possessing technology that would give him a fighting chance of resisting a tyrannical government. Namely, automatic weapons.
You are not allowed to have the types of guns that would make it possible (if improbable) to defend against an illegal government attack on your home, liberty, and life.
Recently, as is often the case in the firearms industry, a device has been invented that makes a semi-automatic rifle fire as rapidly as a truly automatic machine gun. It is called the bump stock.
It works, in case you are not aware, by rocking the gun back and forth against the shooter’s hand- enabling him to fire in rapid succession. It is a very jumpy thing to operate and is not as accurate as an honest to goodness machine gun.
Bump stocks, at the moment, skirt the law by providing a capability similar to an automatic gun without actually being automatic. However, it must be admitted, that a bump stock allows a semi-automatic rifle to deliver a similar effect to an automatic gun. And now, the Trump administration is set to make bump stocks illegal.
“We’re knocking out bump stocks. We’re in the final two or three weeks, and I’ll be able to write out bump stocks. We are now at the final stages of the procedure.” -President Trump
What he’s describing is rewriting the National Firearms Act of 1934 which defines a machine gun as “any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger.”
Bump stocks do not meet that definition, technically. But that’s not what’s important here. What’s important is that the ban on automatic weapons is already unconstitutional. Bump stocks got around the law for a little while. But the law does one thing- it defeats the purpose of the second amendment by giving the government the ability to out-shoot civilians. Its purpose was to make the government afraid of the people- because governments only respect power.
This new twist in the law is built on a precedent that was set decades ago. Most competent shooters look at bump stocks as toys. But this further desecration of our constitutional rights is taking us further down a road that we never should have started on.
Let me first say that I’m a staunch NRA life member & avid hunter.
BUT, the banning of bump stocks doesn’t affect the 2 nd. amendment, we can still have the firearm just move your finger faster & when it comes to matching the military, they have equipment we can’t come close to. so the question of keeping up is mute.
The Second Amendment was written “Extremely Clear “ so even President with moronic ideas , can sit down with an Attorney and finally be told he can’t fucking change our rights unless civil unrest in every city with everyone shooting anyone of authority because they think they will take there guns away. Yes Mr President wake up and speak to the south, we won’t go down on the losing side of Civil War 2. Where way to well armed and your military live in our communities and from captain down believe we’re right so who will fight your war, when we line up against you. It’s a very bad Move. Think it over, or expect major changes one after another.
The militia is all able-bodied citizens willing and able to oppose tyranny. Well “regulated” means trained in the use of arms. The ability to be a “free people” rests in the ability of citizens to overpower tyrannical forces. Governments (local, state or federal) can and will use police and military to enforce its will on the people. It is the people who decide when the will of the government steps across the line. The people will not be able to resist if they are out gunned.
Infringement is any restriction on what arms I can bear (carry or possess) including when, where or how I bear those arms. “Gun control” is NOT about gun control, it is about people control and the ability of the government to protect its power over the people.
AGN and President Trump both miss the mark re: pro-vs.-con bump stocks. The idea that legislation for or against types of firearms will prevent bad uses of guns by (a) angry (b) deranged (c) criminally-inclined individuals or groups is nonsense. As the NRA often has pointed out, it’s the person who is responsible for bad acts, not the choice of weapons. Education about ethical, just living (found mainly in Christianity) that teaches respect for others is the key to a just society — by individuals or governments — that does not infringe on citizens’ God-given rights. Moreover all laws to prevent inconsiderate or harmful acts in some instances can be overcome by ingenious or nefarious people. Laws are only as effective as the ability to enforce them. Additionally, the idea a civilian militia armed with semi- or automatic firearms could overcome a modern-equipped, government-backed government military is silly. That’s like saying the American Indians had a chance against the better-equipped U.S. Army, or even the Indians who faced and lost to the early American settlers who had flintlocks. The people’s only hope is to elect officials who believe in individual rights, the Declaration of Independence and U.S. Constitution as the founding documents of the Republic and as codifications of how the FFs hoped we would act. The concept that a well-regulated civilian militia could take down a tyrannical government is outdated because the FFs didn’t foresee millions of soldiers using tanks, jet planes, a huge government-armed army, navy and air force and satellite weapons. How could a relative handful of AR-15s defeat such firepower? That idea is absurd. The idea that the current resident of the White House would jump on the bandwagon to ban a certain type of weapon is not surprising but nothing more than a political ploy to gain approval, and obviously is a reaction to the Las Vegas massacre caused by a demented man with a cache of bump-stock rifles. Only sure and swift punishment for murderous acts will stop those types of heinous acts. If some say execution isn’t just, then there’s an argument never decided by lawyers (who can bill $200-$1,000 per hour). The simple answer is to make punishments fit crimes (regardless of lawyers and psychologists); it worked in elementary school when I grew up in North Carolina. Even if criminals, especially murderers, don’t learn, society will not have to worry about them repeating evil acts in the future. We don’t permit rabid dogs to wander at will and infect humans and other animals with their deadly disease.
Bump stocks will not infringe on 2nd., but anything that LOOKS like an infringment is bad… America is already a melting pot just ripe for civil war….we will see………..
All firearm restricting laws past and present are un-Constitutional as the Constitution specifically forbids Congress from passing laws that are in conflict with both non and enumerated rights.
Well I can not afford to purchase the amount of ammo I can shoot with a semi auto nor can I afford to buy the components needed to reload the amount of ammo I can shoot. SO WHY WOULD I WANT OR NEED A SLIDE FIRE STOCK. Learn shot placement one shot one kill.!!
While I have never owned a bump stock or even wanted one, I am against them being banned. A greater concern for me is what affect if anything will this have on binary trigger systems> I very much do like those.