You know, this is one I have trouble with. I mean, the second amendment states it very clearly: “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.” And I hate it when people pick and choose with the constitution. Yet…
What I find so compelling about this story are the words I heard in the very first report about it: “the gun, which she had bought five days earlier.” This has been a week now, and for some reason I can’t seem to find any story anywhere that deals with where she got that gun. WalMart? Bass Pro? I don’t know. I’m not even sure it matters. Still I find it odd that I haven’t found even one left-wing bleeding heart liberal blog that seems to care. Maybe I just don’t know where all the liberal blogs are.
You know, to a point I agree with the cliché: “If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.” Because the bad guys will figure out where to get them, even if honest people don’t. But this woman was no hardened criminal. She was a 50-year old mother of two with no criminal past of any kind. If she had to sneak around some dark alley to buy a gun, she would have had no idea how to do that. And nobody really believes she would have killed them, say, with a knife. No, that wasn’t going to happen.
Do we regulate guns, more than we do now? There’s that pesky second amendment you know. On the other hand, according to that amendment, firearms are needed for “a well regulated militia.” I don’t think shooting your kids was exactly what the founding fathers had in mind.
I don’t know the answer. Regulate more? Regulate less? Outlaw guns completely? To me, no solution is right. Who knows, maybe I'm "unAmerican" for even thinking about it. But I do know this. If handguns were illegal, those two kids would still be alive.
And that’s a tough statement to live with.
This was published a few weeks ago on Christian Century, not exactly a bastion of liberaleese. It seems to support your point here. http://www.christiancentury.org/article/2011-01/gun-fantasies
ReplyDeleteAmericans have had the right to keep guns for a long time. It seems only in recent times that mass shootings have begun to occur with more frequency. I think we should consider the why. Why do people consider this a solution to their problems now more than in the past. What’s going on in our culture now that causes the emptiness inside people or the rage that leads them to the conclusion that killing is what they must do.
ReplyDeleteIn creating the bill of rights it seems the creators referring to individual rights in the other amendments. So why should we assume that their intent in the 2nd was any different and that the term militia wasn’t meant to refer to just regular people who might need to bear arms to defend themselves in an individual or community situation?
Also, nobody knows for sure that the mother wouldn’t have killed if she didn’t have a gun. She was driven to kill by something other than a gun.
MW, you certainly may be right about the interactions of the amendments. Which is why I made that point much later in the post. And that's why this topic causes so much confusion for me. No answer seems right. But, while it is possible that lady would have come after her kids with a knife or poison or something, the truth is that most of these crimes are done with guns. If she didn't have access to a gun, would she have found some other way? Obviously that we'll never know.
ReplyDelete