Trust me on this, I’m not going to get political in this post, it’s simply a summary of a conversation Studly Doright and I had this afternoon in regard to the Second Amendmendent to the United States Constitution.
First, here’s that amendment:
“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.”
Normally Studly and I don’t discuss gun issues. We own a couple of guns, but the only time we plan to carry them is when we go to the shooting range to learn which end to hold and which to point.
In other words, we have no plans to run around carrying weapons of deadly force in public. Ours are for snake killng, period.
But there are a whole lot of folks in this country who advocate for open carry of firearms. This gives me the willies for a couple of reasons. 1) how do I know this gun toter is sane and 2) how do I know this gun toter is sane. I could add more reasons, but they’d look just like reasons 1and 2.
The simple answer is there’s no way to know for sure, but in Texas now police officers are not allowed to ask a gun toter if he or she has a permit to carry. That seems counterintuitive: There exists legislation requiring gun owners to have proof of licensing, but the officers who are sworn to uphold that law are not allowed to make sure it’s being followed.
This is where Studly comes into the conversation. I read an article about the new Texas law aloud to him, voicing my concern.
“Well,” said he, “I really don’t see what the problem is as long as the person is obeying the law. Once they step outside the law then police officers can take action.” Then he topped this off with, “It is a second amendment right after all, “‘to keep and bear arms.'”
That always infuriates me when someone isolates that phrase from the amendment, but instead of getting pissed, I said, “Arrgh!!!” Okay, maybe I got a little pissed.
“What?” Studly asked. “That’s what it says, right?”
Patiently I read the entire amendment to him. To me it’s black and white. The well regulated militia is key to the whole argument. But Studly believes that the phrase “well regulated” has more to do with the registration and licensing than with an actual organized militia.
Sigh. This seems to be the cause of much misunderstanding. Not just in my home, but in the nation. I’m not comfortable with folks carrying guns in public. I know all the arguments for and against. I know the propaganda and the emotions involved.
I just wish we could evolve past the Wild West mentality.
Peace, people.
Praying for Eyebrowz 
Guns! I love guns! Big ones, small ones, short ones, tall ones, thin ones, fat ones, this one and that one!
If you see me carrying a gun, it is either in very close proximity to my front door, the gun store, the firing range, or deep in the woods during hunting season. I love my guns but I don’t take them to church, ir the mall, or the theater, or town hall. I don’t wine and dine my guns and I don’t take them out for drinks and a concert! All these things I do with people whom I also love. As with any sane man with multiple lovers, I try my best to make sure they never meet. THAT always ends poorly!
LikeLiked by 3 people
And that’s how it should be. π
LikeLiked by 2 people
Hi,
Hope you don’t mind me jumping in with a couple of points.
First the Supreme Court has ruled (Heller v D.C) that the Militia is a reason for the amendment but not the only reason for the Amendment and self defense is a valid reason to ‘keep and bear arms’.
Second, the phrase “well regulated” would be expressed as well organized today
Finally, the adjective βwell-regulatedβ implies nothing more than the imposition of proper discipline and training. See Johnson 1619 (βRegulateβ: βTo adjust by rule or methodβ); Rawle 121β122; cf. Va. Declaration of Rights Β§13 (1776), in 7 Thorpe 3812, 3814 (referring to βa well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to armsβ).
So IF was to be militia then it should be organized and disciplined. Given that people were expected to respond where ever they were, carrying arms in public was common, accepted and in some cases even required.
Under any of the standards of scrutiny the Court has applied to enumerated constitutional rights, this prohibitionβin the place where the importance of the lawful defense of self, family, and property is most acuteβwould fail constitutional muster.
Third, while as Justice Scalia stated the need for defense of self, family and property is most acute at home; not all crime happens at home. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics 2/3rds of all violent crime happens outside the home or off your own property. Given those odds, doesn’t it make sense to carry a firearm where the violence is most likely to occur?
I carry a firearm in public because once I married and became the stepfather to 3 great kids, I realized I had a responsibility to do everything I could ethically and morally to come back home to them every day. And that meant being able to defend myself against muggers, carjackers, etc.
I just wish we could evolve past the Wild West mentality.
I always find this an interesting argument because it ignores the reality of violence levels in the ‘Old West’ and the more ‘civilized cities’
http://www.guncite.com/wild_west_myth.html
Bob S.
LikeLike
With all due respect I am married to an incredibly strong man who has never felt the need to carry a gun in public. Just like going shirtless in public seems to make some men feel more manly, some need guns to feel safe.
I still have no idea when I see you carrying if you are a good guy, a sane guy, or someone who will open fire. My right to feel secure has been violated.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Ma’am,
I’m glad you are married to such a ‘studly’ man. It doesn’t make me an less of a man to admit I’m not ‘incredibly strong’. It doesn’t hurt my ego to admit even in my prime I wasn’t a great fighter. I recognize my limitations and have acted reasonably in face of those.
I find it interesting that you find it necessary to insult those who decide to carry. It isn’t a matter of feeling more manly; just recognizing that I can’t fight off someone 20 years younger than me. I can’t fight off 3 or 4 at once.
I still have no idea when I see you carrying if you are a good guy, a sane guy, or someone who will open fire
And I have not idea if you are a prostitute, a crazy woman who has drowned her children, a perpetual victim who thinks every glance is a sexual assault or a pickpocket/thief/etc.
It doesn’t matter if you know whether or not you know if I’m sane or safe. The exercise of my rights is not dependent on your knowledge of me.
My right to feel secure has been violated.
My right to self defense does not end where your fear begins. Your right to ‘feel secure’ carries with it absolutely no requirement that I act in order to satisfy your desires.
Let’s turn it around and say my right to be free of the temptation of sex is violated if I see a woman’s figure. Would you agree to wear a burka?
Absolutely not nor would I think it is reasonable.
Bob S.
LikeLike
I’m sorry you felt insulted. But you’re in my territory right now. I come armed with only my words and at the ripe old age of 58 that’s all I’ve ever needed.
When I said my husband is a strong man I meant mentally and emotionally. He isn’t paranoid.
As for me, I’ve travelled all across this beautiful country, often solo, several times on a motorcycle, never having needed a weapon. I believe we invite violence when we cloak ourselves in violence. I choose to live in a way that acknowledges there is violence in the world, but refuses to invite it.
Maybe I’ll be the victim one day. But then maybe I’ll wreck my motorcycle. Maybe I’ll walk in front of a bus. But I won’t be the coward carrying a gun for all the world to know how tough he is.
Oh, if I were a prostitute I doubt I’d be all that threatening to you–after all, you could and might just shoot me.
LikeLiked by 3 people
I come only armed with my words and you felt necessary to be rude and insulting. And you continue by insinuating that because I take different approaches to safety that I’m paranoid.
I disagree what we invite violence into our lives. Some people will target those who appear weak because they want an easy victim. Some people will target those who appear strong because they want to prove themselves. Some people just don’t care who they select as victims — violence can be random.
I pray you are never the victim of a crime as much as I pray I am never the victim. It isn’t paranoia to examine the odds and the consequences then act rationally. Just like people who drive safely and defensive will still buckle up every time they get in the car. Not because they’ve invited a collision into their lives but because they know collisions can happen regardless.
My point about you possibly being a prostitute, a murderer, a child molester is simply we assume that people are law abiding until they prove they aren’t. Just like in driving — each day we expect people to obey the law; yet we are ready to respond when they aren’t. But until they break the law, we give them the benefit of the doubt. I think it sames much about the mind set of a person who sees someone legally carrying a firearm and thinks the worst of them.
Bob S.
LikeLike
Face it. You like carrying a gun. You like for people to have respect for your power–whether real or perceived.
And if I give a guy with a gun the benefit of the doubt I could be dead. Big difference.
Listen, we are finished here. We could type until our fingers turn blue and not change each other’s opinions.
Thanks for your time.
LikeLike
Seeing how I carry a firearm that is Concealed — as is the law in Texas — I find it difficult to see how I’m doing it for respect. As I am having difficulty in believing you know my motivations.
What is more likely is the case is you are applying psychological projection – what you would be doing or feeling in the same situation.
I appreciate you giving me the opportunity to comment. I never expected to change your mind but present the case for why some people do carry. It isn’t out of fear — but to continue our life without fear. It isn’t for respect but out of respect of life – mine, my families, others.
It really seems you are focused on the fear — not myself.
Have a good day.
Bob S.
LikeLike
Hello Bob–if I can weigh in, a few days late, to this. You sound like some of my friends and family, who feel that the only way to be safe in an armed and dangerous world is to be armed yourself. I understand the surface logic, but it seems to me that the more people who arm themselves (including the “good people”) the more fear sets in–the feeling that, if all these other people are armed, and I don’t know who is good and who is up to no good, then the only way for me to be safe is to be armed. The problem is that it does create fear– we’re all watching each other and ready to be the first to draw our guns. It creates a dangerous atmosphere– an even more violent culture. I am an extraordinarily proud American, who believes mightily in the constitution . . . but I’ve lived in other countries on and off, and I can say that I feel less safe in the streets of America after dark than I do in London or Paris, or on the Mediterranean, or almost anywhere. I think this is one issue that Americans haven’t navigated well at all.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Well said. We seem to be devolving as a country.
LikeLike
I always find it interesting when people who support gun control accuse me of living in fear.
The group that says “I can’t trust you to do the right thing, so we have to severely restrict (or ban firearms)” seems to be the ones who fear the most.
” The problem is that it does create fearβ weβre all watching each other and ready to be the first to draw our guns.”
This statement seems to indicate you have not talked to gun owners and those tho carry. Far from being the first to draw; I plan on being the first to run away, to de-escalate the situation, to walk away from confrontation. Because I know that I do have lethal force available.
Most gun owners feel the same way. We talk about situational awareness — being aware our surroundings, being proactive in moving away from trouble. Look around the firearm community; you’ll see a commonly used phrase “don’t do stupid things, don’t go to stupid places and don’t hang around with stupid people”.
Avoidance is a huge part of our plans. Lethal force is the LAST step; it is just one more step we have that those who don’t own/carry have.
“It creates a dangerous atmosphereβ an even more violent culture. ”
Except the facts show otherwise. Look at the crime rate, the firearm fatality, accident and injury rates — all show decades long trends downwards. Homicide rate is approximately HALF of what it was during the 1990s.
All the while, more states have enacted laws allowing Concealed Carry – in fact now all 50 states allow some from of Open or Concealed Carry. 6 States allow unlicensed carry.
The number of firearms being purchased, the number of people with licenses to own or carry has been increasing. So the idea it creates an ‘even more violent culture” is factually wrong.
” America after dark than I do in London or Paris,”
Right. You may feel that way but again the facts don’t support the conclusion. The United Kingdom has a violent crime rate that is 4 times higher than America. Home invasions where people are in residence happen more often in the U.K. then in America. Riots are an annual occurrence in Paris and on and on.
Bob S.
LikeLike
I am a gun owner. And your “facts” don’t hold up.
LikeLike
Actually, the UK vs US stats are skewed, as the UK “violent crime” stats include harrassment, simple assault, etc (many lesser crimes than US “violent crime” designations of aggravated assaults). The comparison is apples to oranges. The Brits love to throw punches in the pub, but there is certainly less violent crime. I’ve lived there, I know this to be true. And, no, I don’t live in fear at all. (And I lived in downtown Chicago for three years and Washington, DC too) Nor do I consider it necessary to ban all firearms. As for riots in Paris–they tend to be less deadly than mass shootings in the US; and less random too. And, yes, I am surrounded by gun owners and I do speak to you all regularly–I know plenty of great people who see the issue so differently from me. But I don’t see gun proliferation making America a stronger nation.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I could rant and rave about this for a thousand words or more. To keep it short, I totally agree, Nananoyz. I grew up in a part of the US where guns are as common as hammers. Violent crime is at a low, even figuring in the gun-toting weirdos who shoot up people at the movies, so the “protection” argument is specious. I’m sure the gun-toting people would like to argue about that, but really, don’t bother. The more some people talk the less happy I am with our liberal gun-laws, achieving the exact opposite of what they want!
LikeLiked by 2 people
I have a difficult time with people talking down to the little lady about my not understanding their need to carry a gun and how said gun endangers me more than just about anything else. Their answer is always “we need more guns.” We’ve come to a sad impasse if that’s the case. I truly believe the NRA pumps up the fear factor to put more money in the pockets of gun manufacturers.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I am so with you on this. Concealed carry is crazy. I vote for kitten carry.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Kitten carry is the solution.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Reblogged this on Praying for Eyebrowz and commented:
An oldie, but relevant.
LikeLike
As a Canadian, I do not have the experience of growing up in the USA, a country I deeply love regardless. So I cannot speak as a born American speaks. I lived in Brooklyn for a summer, and have visited many states many times. So what I can speak of is what I have felt, but more importantly what I saw/can see.
1. The USA has BLESSED the world with unbelievable gifts. The car, the airplane, Diet Pepsi, the dozens of GENIUSES (male and female) who made JAZZ, Rock n Roll, and the Blues happen. The USA gave us both Philip Glass and Billy Holiday, the vocal genius of Carman McRae, Ernest Hemmingway, Romare Bearden, John Cage, Laurie Anderson, JIMI HENDRIX (!!!!!!), and so so so so many more. The USA could win the greatest country in the world award for Miles Davis alone, let alone the hundreds of other Americans who are doing and will do brilliant work in the future.
1.5. When I live and travel in the USA I was treated extremely kindly. Americans are a majority of decent, kind people – in both the lowest and highest economic classes – and in the vanishing middle class. I have been treated kindly in both the projects and on Wall St.
2. The USA is ALSO the home of the Sandy Hook Massacre where 20 children between the ages of 6 – 8 years were gunned down at their school. We, the rest of the world, celebrate the great achievements of Americans, and also watch your politicians do NOTHING when children are murdered. I am not judging anyone, but it is a fact that nothing in the USA changed when children were slaughtered. We, the rest of the world, watch and see. Restricting known ISIS-sympathizers and unstable people’s access to the AR-15 rifle in NO way violates the Second Amendment (bearing arms/militia), yet children die, and nothing is done.
3. The world watches… the debate rolls on, and I DO NOT stand in judgement of America as a whole. But I WITNESSED the aftermath of children dying violently and nothing changing in Washington. If Sandy Hook was “not enough,” if guns blowing holes in CHILDREN does not work… then what can we assume about the USA? The world mourns with the USA… and we share in your truly righteous indignation of watching your political class tacitly accept, via non-action, the murdering of children (as the inevitable status quo)… as they do NOTHING.
4. The world stands in solidarity with good, decent Americans who both own or do not own guns… we stand with both.
5. BUT IF Sandy Hook is not enough, I am afraid slaughtering your own children and ethnic minorities and LBGTQ Americans will eventually metastasize your cultural legacy. Mahalia Jackson will be forgotten: hidden, veiled, and/or obscured by a dense fog of Radically Invasive Projectiles ripping through anyone and everyone… the New Terminal Normal….
The world loves the USA, still. We just wish that the politicians would love the children of Sandy Hook more than AR-15s…
LikeLiked by 4 people
Amen amen! My heart feels so broken.
LikeLiked by 2 people
There is still plenty of hope. And if Donald Trump wins the Presidency, I encourage all Americans to NOT let him “win” by moving to Canada. Running away from Trump just gives the country over to everything he stands for. Republicans didn’t move to Canada in 2008 or 2012. They stayed and fought, even though their party election has been hijacked by a fraudulent Uber-narcissist who lies every 0.009 seconds.
The USA wins when Americans stay and fight.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oh, a great many folks will make noises about moving out of country, but few will. Of course, I’m going to do everything in my power to keep him from winning.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I find it strange that the strongest voices I have heard for moving to Canada are those of people like Lena Dunham, who say they celebrate diversity. It would seem she likes diversity, when it is only the brand(s) of diversity she likes…
I say stand up to Trump right where it actually counts, in America!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Folks like Lena have the means to move, and I won’t fault her if she does. But I agree, the best way to handle Trump is right here at home.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The sentiment is understandable, but real world Trump requires real world solutions. Trump is in America, thus America needs Lena and her voice and her position to stand up for Trump. She has fought for women passionately, it is time to continue to fight for women and men when amongst you arises a proud liar who discriminates against immigrants….while marrying them!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you for this blog post, and for inspiring me to respond:
I personally have a deep, abiding aversion to guns. When I was 15, my next door neighbor and best friend (who happened to be quite tall) found a .22 caliber handgun gun on top of our refrigerator, which my father had apparently stashed there sometime shortly after my parents separated that year. I hadn’t known anything about the gun’s existence until it was being impulsively pointed at me (no, my friend with the normal frontal lobe development of a teen was not at fault here). Luckily, my nine-year-old brother happened to walk in at that very moment and yell, “Don’t shoot, it’s loaded!” (because, as it turned out, he had known about the gun, and he was the one who’d loaded it…). There are no two ways to look at the potential outcome of having a loaded gun pointed in your face.
A lot of people have passionate beliefs about the right to own and use weapons designed for killing. I try very hard to appreciate these people’s perspectives on gun access and ownership, particularly when they otherwise seem to be tolerant, balanced, and capable of empathy and reason. What I can see is that guns afford an unprecedented (in terms of human evolution) ability to exert destructive power, and this very notion (whether or not it is ever put into practice) induces an addictive, seductive flow of endorphins, which people experience as a sense of safety and well-being, and even the most well-meaning people can easily become subject to this influence. This is how pro-gun activists so easily capitalize on the potential for revenue that is associated with guns, and it explains (though it is certainly no excuse for) how an incident like the massacre of children at Sandy Hook would actually result in a more widespread, vehement refusal to abdicate the right (as people believe our founding government grants them — though, the degree to which this is true is debatable…) to access the very same means to deadly force. One argument I often hear in favor of maintaining currently liberal LEGAL provisions for gun access, is that more restrictive gun laws will do nothing to prevent (and would likely promote) the further proliferation of a black market for guns. Granting that this could well be the case, drawing this mindset to its logical conclusion would also demonstrate that flooding a market with legal guns in no way reduces the number of guns in circulation, certainly does not make them less accessible to individuals who intend to perpetrate mass harm, and will absolutely not serve to deter them from carrying out these intentions. Moreover, behind the seemingly noble motivation of carrying a gun to “protect oneself and one’s family” against violence is necessarily a patent hope of preemptively, successfully committing violence, bottom line.
Our constitution’s supposed guarantee of certain human rights and liberties for all law-abiding citizens notwithstanding, people’s unflagging insistence that a document ratified in 1791 — which did not encompass, or even envision, an extension of citizenship and civil rights to a once-enslaved population, or to women, in general — yet somehow adequately provisions for the social and technological climate we now inhabit, is beyond my comprehension. Even my husband, who has never owned a gun, and who has always been sympathetic to my personal feelings about guns, has generally been convinced that our 2nd Amendment “right” to protect and defend ourselves against the threat of violence and corruption should in theory allow for citizens’ lawful access to any and all weapons designed for killing (whether or not the bald-faced theory is functionally, morally viable, I choose to presume, being beside the point). At any rate, he is a competent, open-minded, non-violent man, who seems to agree with some pro-gun views, and whose opinions on the matter have been consistent…
which brings me to this final point: when I first heard about the horrific slaughter in Orlando on Sunday, and brought it to my husband’s attention, I immediately mentioned Mateen’s use of a military grade assault rifle, and expressed dismay/horror/hopelessness/take your pick that it is even possible for anyone to access such a weapon. My husband, making the relatively sane assumption that the weapon had to have been obtained illegally, still proffered that the use of an assault rifle in and of itself is only indicative of a problem with the lawful purchase of guns, if it was LEGALLY obtained. When I read further, and reported to him that Mateen had, indeed, legally purchased the gun less than two weeks prior, it was the first time that my general expression of outrage/dismay/horror/hopelessness/take your pick when it comes to guns wasn’t met with cool-headed, dispassionate, “rational” theorizing… Instead, there was a moment of shocked silence, and then a subdued concession, “That’s not good.”
NO, IT ISN’T GOOD…. If you ask me, “it” never was. The whole concept of the “Right to Bear Arms,” however it may have been intended 230 years ago, is fundamentally flawed.
As for the sense in carrying a concealed weapon in public, what the fuck good could it possibly do you if you are ambushed in a parking lot, or mowed down in a bar (or a mall, or a concert hall, or a government building…) by a lunatic with a Sig Sauer MCX? Seriously…
LikeLiked by 2 people
Stephanie, thank you for sharing. I cannot imagine the terror of having a gun pointed at me and how just one millisecond stood between life and death for you.
I hope you’re blogging about your experience; although, as you say those who are entranced by their guns are unlikely to be swayed.
I just don’t understand how after Sandy Hook we continued following the status quo.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oh, dear. We have Jehovah’s Witnesses in this country who take the Bible literally
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oh, we’ve got those, too, along with similar sects.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I am a gun owner. And your βfactsβ donβt hold up.
What facts do you disagree with ?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Your comparison of US vs. Great Britain for one.
LikeLike
I don’t have the patience to wade into the argument, but I just have to add that your ending graphic says everything that needs to be said.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I had to backtrack to see what that was!
LikeLiked by 1 person
That sounds like a lot of the conversations I have on my blog. Someone sends a comment and I read it and thing, We were talking about what???
LikeLiked by 1 person
Often I can’t even remember what the original post was about.
LikeLiked by 1 person