Confessions of a liberal who supports the right to bear arms: Commentary

[spin]

It’s easy to assume that someone who calls himself a “liberal” is automatically pro-choice, pro-welfare, and anti-gun, but politics are rarely so black-and-white. Normally I avoid the first-person in my articles, but as you read on you will see that in this case it was unavoidable.

***snip***

I believe the Second Amendment is here to stay, despite the fact that the needs which made it so important when our constitution was written no longer apply. Individuals carrying handguns have absolutely nothing to do with “a well regulated militia” and have nothing to do with securing a “free state.” Over the summer we saw demonstrations outside town hall meetings over health care reform, where individuals open-carried their guns and espoused the philosophy that it was time to “Water the Tree of Liberty” with the blood of their perceived tyrants. This part of the Second Amendment, securing our freedom, has also been emasculated by the sheer military power of our homeland defense. Any so-called “militia” or freedom fighters who would try any Liberty Tree watering or try targeting any tyrants would end up buried under said tree, faster than you can say, “Second Amendment.”
In 1791 when the Second Amendment was written and ratified, there were about 4 million people in the entire United States, about half of the population of modern-day New York City. There was no law, there were no police forces, nothing but a small standing army, and there was a great need for individuals and families to protect themselves and their land.

Today in a country with over 300 million people jammed into crowded cities, we still have a need to protect ourselves and our families, but not because there is no law or law enforcement, it is because our society has become more violent, and our domestic “evil-doers” and criminals are sometimes better armed than the law enforcement engaged in trying to stamp out the crime and criminals. And why? Because there are so many guns in this country, and they are so easy to get, they are one of the most important sale items on the black market to stock the arsenals of those criminals.

Funny how what goes around comes around. The Second Amendment was intended to ensure and protect our freedom. Instead, it has made that freedom more tenuous by making many urban dwellers prisoners in their own homes due to the amount of street violence in their neighborhoods.

Yes, believe it or not, I support your right to bear arms, and protect yourself, I ask only a few simple things that I believe go with that responsibility of being armed. Learn how to use your weapon safely and responsibly, keep it secured from curious children, and keep it out of the hands of criminals by making sure that it is secured at all times, so thieves and burglars can’t get their hands on it. And one final thing, please don’t shoot at me. I’m one of the good guys, even if you don’t agree with all of my political views. Peaceful political debate, that more than anything, more than all the guns in this country is what keeps our nation free from tyranny. emphasis added
http://www.examiner.com/x-24111-Liberal-Issues-Examiner~y2009m12d19-Confessions-of-a-liberal-who-supports-the-right-to-bear-arms-Commentary

[AlinPA]

1. I worry sometimes that with the huge tension between Democrats and republicans things

will get violent. The raging hatred toward Obama at the events in summer seem to have settled down, but things like praying for death of a senator (God didn't answer the republican prayers yet) is still indicative of the hatred. We've always had guns and lived peaceably, but now things are white hot.

[AtheistCrusader]

3. I worry about the climate too.

When I go to the range and such, I often hear the kind of tension you are describing. I find it somewhat theraputic to engage them in calm dialog, and defuse some of that tension.

It can be done. People just need to keep talking.

[AtheistCrusader]

2. Problems.

"I believe the Second Amendment is here to stay, despite the fact that the needs which made it so important when our constitution was written no longer apply. Individuals carrying handguns have absolutely nothing to do with “a well regulated militia” and have nothing to do with securing a “free state.” Over the summer we saw demonstrations outside town hall meetings over health care reform, where individuals open-carried their guns and espoused the philosophy that it was time to “Water the Tree of Liberty” with the blood of their perceived tyrants. This part of the Second Amendment, securing our freedom, has also been emasculated by the sheer military power of our homeland defense. Any so-called “militia” or freedom fighters who would try any Liberty Tree watering or try targeting any tyrants would end up buried under said tree, faster than you can say, “Second Amendment.”"


While I agree, and would be first in line to help preserve the state, in the latter scenario, I do have problems with the characterization of handguns in the former. Sidearms are carried by soldiers, and as the term Parabellum or 'pistol for war' suggests, a handgun is a useful tool for anyone engaged in combat. It might not be the right tool at a given moment, but it needs to be part of your standard kit.

Korean storeowners, protecting their businesses and their lives from arsonists and rioters did so with everything from break-action shotguns, to pistols, and in doing so, served the security of a free state.

[spin]

4. While his opinions were interesting, they were not accurate...

handguns did indeed have something to do with a "well regulated" militia and also were used during the Revolutionary war.

While some people believe that handguns did not exist when the Patriots were fighting for their right to arms, handguns were actually hundreds of years old by then. Handguns had grown common enough in the early sixteenth century that legislation was proposed as early as 1518 (by the Holy Roman Emperor Maximilian) to address them; and by the latter part of the 1500s, handguns were standard cavalry weapons. When the Second Amendment was ratified in 1791, state militia laws requiring most men to supply their own firearms required officers to supply their own pistols.

The Revolutionary War handguns were mostly very large .50-caliber single-shot pistols, often built by the same gunsmiths who made the Pennsylvania Rifles. Colonel Samuel Colt's multiple-shot revolver lay decades in the future — although there were predecessors available, such as "pepperbox," which used revolving barrels, each containing its own bullet. emphasis added
http://www.davekopel.com/NRO/2000/Guns-of-Our-Freedom.htm

[GreenStormCloud]

5. He needs to learn more.

Funny how what goes around comes around. The Second Amendment was intended to ensure and protect our freedom. Instead, it has made that freedom more tenuous by making many urban dwellers prisoners in their own homes due to the amount of street violence in their neighborhoods.

He asssumes that all violence is gun violence and that if guns weren't there, then there would be no violence. Get rid of all guns and then the strongest crooks would rule the rest. A gun give me, a senior citizen, the ability to successfully resist an attack from a 19yr old convicted and paroled, violent felon who got buffed up during his last few months in prison.