Religious Orders

Bang, Bang, Shoot to Kill!

Posted: Friday September 18 2009 @ 1:13pm

Religious Order: Politics

So I yapped a bit about the Ninth Amendment. And I'm sure all my liberal friends loved me for it. Now I'm gonna argue about an Amendment I think we lefties get wrong, the Second 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.

Where I think we lefties get this wrong is in claiming that the first half of the Amendment acts as a modifier for the second half. In other words, that the Amendment grants folks the right to carry guns only to the extent needed to provide a for the security of the country.

Unfortunately for us, that's not what it says. It sets up a condition to be addressed, then sets up a means to address said condition. It does not then follow that the means are constrained to the condition.

To help see this, let's remove the semantic issue from the loaded politics that surround it.

Let's pretend that we have a dumb-ass for a President who can't be trusted to eat a damn pretzel without potentially choking to death on it. (I know, seems like only yesterday, doesn't it.) To protect the President, we might have an Amendment that says:

A non-choking-to-death President being necessary to the functioning of the Executive Branch, the manufacture, sale, or transportation of pretzels within, the importation thereof into, or the exportation thereof from the United States and all territory subject to the jurisdiction thereof is hereby prohibited.

So, what does this mean? Does it mean that pretzels are banned to the extend necessary to prevent the President from choking on one? Maybe within a 100 mile radius of the guy?

No, it means the damn things are banned. Completely. (If you really hate the example, substitute cheeseburgers and think about Bill's cholesterol levels.)

If we divorce the semantics from the political issue, we see the real problem. The real problem is that the means used to address the condition are overly broad. How do you fix that problem? Well, luckily, there's a process for that. It's called Amending the Constitution. Unluckily for us lefties, it ain't gonna happen with regards to the Second Amendment. And what do we do about that? Nothing. It's called tough titties. We don't always get our way. That's how life is.

What we shouldn't be doing is claiming that the plain language of the Amendment says something that it doesn't. Why? Because then we're no better than the fools who apparently can't read and understand the Ninth Amendment.

So, after all of this, does mean that I'm pro-gun? No way! Defending the Second Amendment != Pro-Gun. For most of us, owning a gun is a stupid, stupid thing to do. But, what about our right to defend ourselves? Well, it's not about that at all. It's the simple fact that most of us would be too busy pissing ourselves to be able to pull the trigger.

I know, I know, you have these daydreams of being a hard muthafucker who can pop a cap without blinking. Guess what? I have them, too. They're daydreams. You aren't really gonna be able to do that kind of shit. It's hard to admit, especially for guys. If it makes it any easier, Bruce Willis and Kiefer Sutherland don't really go around beating up terrorists either. (A fact Scalia doesn't understand. Yes, that should scare you.)

What having a gun in your house means is that what are essentially property disputes immediately escalate to life-or-death situations. I own a lot of stuff. But none of it, not my MacBook, not my statue of Moon Knight, nothing, is worth me or my family getting hurt over. And, if I'm honest with myself, I know that in a gun wielding situation, even a half-assed criminal has it all over me.

Plus, of course, it's much more likely you'll kill one of your own family though accident or rage than ever take on a criminal.

Oh, I hear you say, but you're different. Probably not. Here's the deal: the US military expends loads of resources to turn men into people willing to kill when necessary. Why? Because that's what it takes to turn men into hard muthafuckers who can pop a cap without blinking. (Good thing, too.) Unless you've recently had the benefit of that training, that ain't you.

And if you have had that training? Then you can probably get some use out of a piece. Of course, you're also probably on your 5th tour of the Middle East because the country as a whole is unwilling to shoulder part of the burden we're asking you to carry. Which is another topic entirely.

No comments yet!

Your Name:

Your Email:
(not shown, but logged along with your IP)

Your comments:
(no HTML allowed, at all)

3 plus 5 equals

Secular Stuff

RSS 2.0 Feed