I like to keep my ear to the grindstone, and with that listening, I keep hearing and seeing this debate about gun issues and the second amendment. As statistics are thrown around, the mental health of U.S. citizens is being flocked or paraded around as a trophy of piety or neglected; those who are hurting are hurting others, and those who hurt others do not care. I cannot help but ask, is there a responsibility of the self, of possessions, of our own cultural influence anymore?
For the sake of argument, I am placing the second Amendment on here and then say my peace about it. I am curious though, in all seriousness, to those who are for disarming citizens, have you ever read this amendment and looked closer at it?
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 the time when some of those who lived in the continental states were hashing it out with mother country England (some did not want to break away from it as well), there was the issue of, while under the authority of England, they were being forced to disarm themselves so they were not a threat to the British military. When the writing of the Constitution was being debated, there was no formal military at that time such as it is now; the Militia then and the Military now, is made up of voluntary citizens. Now, the formal military is made up of voluntary citizens, yet the military is under the authority of the U.S. Government.
To disarm the citizens is to disarm the organization of protection of U.S. citizens in a time of insurgency and threats by enemies, both foreign and domestics. It is unfortunate the government and those who are the majority of its members, who are placed into positions of power by the citizens, have continually neglected not just their promises, but also the position of responsibility and service to their constituents.
In the Declaration of Independence, it is said that the people have the right to “alter or to abolish” the government and reinstitute it in the way that protects their Safety and Happiness. But what happens when the citizens are given what they want with no cost, education, and benefits at the will of others in power, and our basic human needs are left satiated and deprived by an assumed force? Why are the statistics presented by the liberal side not questioned by those who want others to be disarmed? Is the object of opposition upon inanimate objects, or the fear of what is perceived to be the inevitable?
Asking and willing to answer honestly these questions and others are the starting point for understanding the gun control debate. Placing a focus on an issue that is not just highly debatable yet made up of more than gun issues and neglected facts that are already in place, is to misplace the history and protection of the People both then and now, is detracting from the framework that is being dismantled in America. What is and always has been placed squarely on the shoulders of those who are responsible to uphold the Constitution, and made alive by the Declaration, are the citizens of the United States of America.
So what are guns? What is self-protection? Rights and privileges are not the same things. Privileges are given to us when certain criteria are met and can be taken away if the rules and boundaries of the privilege are broken. Rights are embedded in us to preserve, watch out for and signals to our freedom the responsibility we have, not just as individuals but also as a community, a country. Again, privileges can be revoked and taken. Rights are fought for, but they can appear to be handed over by the People out of free will, or under duress and strain, they are told they cannot handle. So how are they inalienable as the Declaration of Independence states? Because they are innate within the individual and out of that, we the People realize again that freedom and we fight for that freedom the individual and community desire.