Reblog: The History and Context of the Second Amendment

This post is VERY long, but it’s something that needs to be read by every U.S. citizen. Some more than others.

A Point of Contention

Of Guns, Armies, and Slaves

Today I want to talk about the second amendment. Not gun control in general mind you, but specifically the Second Amendment, it’s history and it’s context. The Second Amendment is frequently invoked in Gun Control debates and I feel that it’s almost a hollow mantra, a slogan, something people say reflexively but lacking the kind of well rounded historically grounded understanding that something like that, I believe, merits. 

So the main question I am setting out to answer today, really the only question, is “Why is the Second Amendment in the Constitution?” We have a good understanding of causes and grievances that drove most of the rest of the items in the Bill of Rights to be placed there. The Old World had been full of State Religions and heavy censorship of the press, so the First Amendment addressed those concerns. England had made…

View original post 3,308 more words


“Shooting Back”

By now, most of us have read or heard about the (very) recent Nevada shooting. And once again, after these events, I ask myself the following question:

Why don’t we ever hear of anyone “shooting back” during these mass shootings? Some have taken place in states where concealed (and even open-carry) weapons are legal, yet I don’t recall reading or hearing about anyone whipping out their pistol or rifle to stop the shooter. Surely at least one or more individuals would be present at such events and be willing and able to take steps to stop the shooter?

Of course in the Nevada shooting, it would have been impossible since the gunman was in an entirely different location. But what about in a movie theater (as happened some years back)? Or in a mall? Or some other place where the shooter is “accessible” and could be “put down”?

Could it be that FEAR overrides the noble idea of protecting oneself and others?


Protection or Hypocrisy?

I doubt I’m the only one who noticed the report about weapons being banned at tRump’s recent speech to the NRA. Although it’s reported this was a condition of the Secret Service, not directly attributed to the NRA, it does raise an important question.

From a CNN article:

The Secret Service works closely with our local law enforcement partners in each state to ensure a safe environment for our protectees and the public,” the agency said in a statement.

Hmmm. Does anyone else get the connection? A safe environment = no weapons?

From Gizmodo:

The NRA is fond of saying that the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. But when it comes to important people, I guess the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a total ban on guns. Go figure.

Go figure, indeed.