The Real Reason We Need 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.”
The constitution was never meant to be controversial, but what you read above is one of the most debated issues we know in America today. What you read was the second amendment.
On September 17, 1787, thirty-nine delegates signed the constitution. For centuries we have strictly followed these rules made by our for-fathers. Despite how much our leaders may disagree their policy has always been under the framework of the constitution. This strict obedience is what allowed for the preservation of a promise made so long ago. That promise is freedom. And as soon as the preservation falters so does liberty.
I would say for quite a few years now the left has increasingly ramped up its attack on our second amendment. “Hell yes, we’re going to take your AR-15, your AK-47” “a renewal of the assault weapon ban” These are quotes from Beto and Harris that you have probably heard. I will not lie and say that most mainstream democrats wish to take ALL of your guns because they don’t. What they do want to do is regulate guns, and that’s all it takes.
The Reason For The Second Amendment
A common misconception amongst the left is that the second amendment was made for hunting and recreation. This is very wrong. Sure you can do those things but that isn’t the reason for the amendment. The founding fathers believed in a right you might not know. The right to overthrow an oppressive government. According to the founders, all governments were made to serve the people and if it fails the people hold the right to overthrow it (there is no doubt this was inspired by their previous experience with a tyrannical ruler). If the said government is vastly more powerful than the people and the people have no means of gaining strength, then is the right really a right or just words. The founders considered this which is why they gave us full freedom to bear any gun one may want. I believe one of our government’s greatest feats is admital that it can go bad, therefore its citizens should be ready to fight it.
I can’t help but laugh when politicians talk about how you don’t need ARs to hunt. They are completely missing the point.
I know what you may be thinking. I’m being a conspiracy theorist and a doomsayer. Are we really ever going to have to overthrow our own country? Probably not. At least not for a while. For the most part, we don’t live in a tyrannical country. Why? Because about half the population owns guns. The firearms never have to be shot to deter tyranny, simply the pressure of the weapons. A country will never intrude upon its civilians so long as they have the ability to fight back.
The Left’s Arguments Against Guns
“If gun violence is a problem then let’s get rid of guns.” This is something that you might hear from the democrats. The problem with this idea is the issue is a little more complicated than that. According to a study done by the Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research, only 13% of gun violence was committed with firearms actually bought at a store. Most people wanting to commit a crime don’t use a legal gun. This means that making guns illegal would in no way affect the access criminals have to guns. Another study important to point out is that a majority of gun violence is committed with handguns, something democrats don’t wish to get rid of (yet). Meaning their assault-rifle ban wouldn’t have much of an effect because that’s not what most criminals even use.
Restricting people’s access to certain guns would only limit GOOD people from having the firearms they need. On the contrary, bad people will continue to use them. I don’t believe people wishing to MURDER SOMEONE would care much about some gun law. Gun restrictions only make the innocent more vulnerable.
The Problem With Infringing An Amendment
Before I finish I think it is important to note the danger in changing one of our basic ten rights. Never before has something like this happened. What sort of example are we setting if the democrats go through with their plans. You are setting the precedent that our rights can be violated if they are deemed dangerous enough. If Americans get rid of the second amendments, in twenty years the debate could be whether we should keep the first amendment or the third or fourth. It doesn’t make a difference whether you completely abolish or just slightly edit the amendment. The precedent is still there. Rights don’t change with time. If you don’t stand your ground on one thing, they believe they can take everything. Give them one inch and they will take a mile.
