In the Wake of Tragedy, Reflection Takes Time

Transcription

1 In the Wake of Tragedy, Reflection Takes Time February 21, 2013 Section I. Historical Reference Can you answer these questions: Who killed President Abraham Lincoln? Who killed President William McKinley? Who killed President James A. Garfield? Who killed President John F. Kennedy? Section II. Aftermath of Tragedy A unique feature of our society is that after a tragedy our People look for an answers to why it happened at all. However our government tends to over-react, to calm emotions of its people, and to not look as if they don t care or they are not actively engaged in the situation. When this happens you are left with laws such as the one in New York State (S.A.F.E. Act) that was passed through the legislature without the appropriate reading and debate, which curtailed firearm use by individuals including the local police authorities (who are garnered the now illegal firearms and magazines by the state itself). Sometimes less is more, and it would serve the People in the long term to reflect before acting, then short term political gains of acting. An issue of reflection on tragedy cannot be solved in one day, or within one month. Passions are too high and haste leads to oversights. Gun rights v gun control must have a common ground within our country, and the People must be protected on both sides of the debate, under the Constitution that binds us all. Section III. Statistics In 2009 the 15 leading causes of death were: Rank: Cause of Death: Total Number of Deaths: 1 Heart Disease 599,413 2 Cancer 567,628 3 Chronic lower respiratory diseases 137,353 4 Stroke 128,842 5 Accidents 118,021 6 Alzheimer s 79,003 7 Diabetes 68,705 8 Influenza and pneumonia 53,692 9 Kidney disease 48, Suicide 36, Septicemia 35, Chronic liver disease and cirrhosis 30, Hypertension 25, Parkinson s 20, Homicide 16,799

2 (1) Of the 16,799 homicides, 11,078 were caused by firearms or 0.46% of all deaths in 2009(2). That is not to say that firearm violence isn t an issue, but to put it in terms of deaths in 2009, 37,261 people died in traffic accidents or 1.53% of all deaths. How come there isn t a rush by State governments to ban driving? In 2009, 144,874 people died in New York State. 1,156 or 0.80% of deaths were caused by car accidents and 819 or 0.57% (includes all homicide and legal intervention; New York State Department of Health does not report total number of homicides by firearms as a statistic.) of deaths were caused by homicides as opposed to heart disease, 46,312 (31.97%) or Malignant Neoplasms 34,822 (24.04%) or AIDS 1,080 (0.75%). It is horrific to see an innocent life taken from us in such a violent way. Sometimes we forget though, the firearm didn t cause that, a person did. People, when not in the right state of mind don t need a gun. Could an individual not put rat poison into a food supply and cause more fatalities than a gunman? If we ran a search for how to make a pipe bomb you would receive over 130 million different links. Why can we use our freedom of speech to show individuals how to make a bomb, but not the right to bear arms, to own a gun? Section IV. The 2 nd 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. Section IV. An Armed Individual or Militia A major stance on the Second Amendment and the right to bear arms is that the Amendment itself does not guarantee the right of an individual, but that of the militia or army. This is based on the first half of the Amendment, a well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State. However, since we no longer have militia, (we now have standing armies; the National Guard and the U.S. Military) the Second Amendment is null-and-void. The question then becomes, what was the militia and why did the First Congress use this as the basis of the argument for giving people the right to bear arms. When the Constitution was written, the country was in essence thirteen very individual States, with their own government loosely connected by the Articles of Confederation. They were still quite fearful of a centralized power as they had just fought a long bloody war to cut ties with the last tyrannical central power, the King of England. So each state tended to look out for the interest of their State, their people and a way for at the first sound of tyranny, could call up their militia (people) to defend their liberties and freedoms. Once the Federal Convention of 1787 comes together and writes what would become the Constitution of the United States, the states were still very cautious in allowing a centralized federal government too much power; which is why they requested a Bill of Rights be added in order to establish these individual rights of the People. According to the Federalist 46; Let a regular army, fully equal to the resources of the country be formed; and let it be entirely at the devotion of the federal government; still it would not be going too far to say, that the state governments with the people on their side would be able to repel the danger. The highest

3 number to which, according to the best computation, a one hundredth part of the whole number of souls; or one twenty-fifth part of the number able to bear arms. This proportion would not yield in the United States an army of more opposed a militia amounting to near half a million of citizens with arms in their hands, officered by men chosen from among themselves, fighting for their common liberties, and united and conducted by governments possessing their affections and confidence (3). This of course was written before the passage of the Second Amendment under the Bill of Rights and does not fully establish the individual s right to bear arms, but it establishes the States right to defend itself, in terms of its citizen s militia (made up of individual people), against the tyranny of the United States government and the individuals within those states have the right to defend their liberties. So if every state is guaranteed the right that its people could bear arms, in the form of a militia in order to defend their common liberties from the tyranny of a federal government, and the Bill of Rights are rights guaranteed to the Individual People; no federal law can restrict this right on the states. On the other hand, no state can deny its citizens the right to form militia against an oppressive government, as it would be in violation of the federal law; the Second Amendment. Even New York State s Constitution of 1777 states, it is the duty of every man who enjoys the protection of society to be prepared and willing to defend it at all times hereafter, as well in peace as in war, shall be armed and disciplined, and in readiness for service (4). This in essence answers the question of what a militia is; a group of individuals from the same state, who elect their own officers, to defend their liberties from any oppressive government (local, state or federal), if necessary with arms. It also shows that the individual states themselves recognized that every individual not only had the right to bear arms, but had the duty to do so. This however does not end the debate over the gun rights v gun control. Our society has advanced as has arms over the last two centuries, and we must recognize our duty to our State and Country, but that it does not always include the duty to own a firearm; it does however allow for the right. If state and federal governments can pass no law abridging the right to bear arms, is there anything that can be done? The answer is yes; revise the Second Amendment through the process of another Amendment to the Constitution. Section V. Arms Evolution and the Evolution of the Second Amendment If individuals were guaranteed the right to bear arms under the Second Amendment it becomes warranted to discuss what is an arm. In 1789 when the Bill of Rights was established by the First Congress, the arm of the day was a single shot rifle or pistol (or cannon; however; I do not know of any individuals who kept cannon as their individual arms, but it does seem possible there could have been). Today arms have advanced far beyond the single shot guns of the Revolution to include shotguns, rifles, machine guns, explosive devices, large caliber weapons, other weapons, and silencers. This is the foundation for the gun control argument; what the First Congress had envisioned as arms is not in fact the arms we have today so the government should curtail the sale and use of these arms. This would then reduce the gun violence we have within our society.

4 It is true that the First Congress would have found it difficult to imagine the types of guns we have today. It would however seem rational to believe that as with the passage of the Constitution, they would be inclined that this decision should not be waged by the 537 members of the Federal Government (0.01% of the population); but by the People at large. Yes, we did elect these individuals to work together to write laws to maintain our right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. We also have a Constitution that guarantees our individual rights by allowing the People to make major changes to the Constitution; the Amendment process. If arms today have progressed to the point in which society as a whole, believes they are more of a hazard then tyranny, let the People s voice be heard. Propose a Constitutional Amendment that defines the right to bear arms and have 38 States approve it. Then the question of whether you have the right to bear arms is set in stone, in language that can be interpreted in no other way. If the arms of today have evolved past the imagination of the Founders, then so too should the language. Section VI. Histories Lessons Now remember the questions asked at the beginning? Do you remember your answers? Most people would say that: President Abraham Lincoln was assassinated by John Wilkes Booth. President William McKinley was assassinated by Leon Czolgosz. President James A. Garfield was assassinated by Charles Guiteau. President John F. Kennedy was assassinated by Lee Harvey Oswald. If guns killed people, then history should recall the assassinations like this: President Abraham Lincoln was assassinated with a single shot Philadelphia Derringer. President William McKinley was assassinated with a.32-caliber Iver-Johnson "Safety Automatic" revolver. President James A. Garfield was assassinated with a.44-caliber British Bulldog handgun. President John F. Kennedy was assassinated with a bolt-action Carcano M1891/38 rifle. History however, does not see it this way and for good reason. The question is not what, it is who. Who killed these individuals? Guns don t kill People, People kill People. As irrational as that might be to a stable mind, we have and always will have individuals that in an emotional state, use a form of weapon to kill another human being. It however is a tragic shock and emotional drain when it is our children who were killed by the use of a firearm. If members of both parties wanted to protect the rights of the individual; to bear arms and to be protected against violence they would propose an amendment to the Constitution that specified what an individual right to bear arms is defined as today. Section VII. Accepted Violence in Society It is a benefit of being recognized around the world to be able to speak upon a subject such as firearm violence, and entertainers of all forms should be thanked for doing so. However, it should be noted that violence in society is accepted to the point of indifference to the People now, part of which is due to our

5 constant exposure and desensitization to violence. 55% of the movies released in 2012 contained violence and of the top 10 grossing movies, 7 contained violence. It might be a more sincere notion to stop violence, curtail the use of firearms in violent crimes, when one is not making a multi-million dollar a year living off of promoting it. So to those who do wish this, please sign a pact today stating you will no longer make violent movies that use the firearms you wish to ban in real life. - A Silence DoGood 1. "Center for Disease Control." Center for Disease Control. Center for Disease Control, Web. 19 Feb < 2. Kochanek, Kenneth D.. Center for Disease Control. Center for Disease Control, Web. 20 Feb < 3. scigliano, Robert. The Federalist A Commentary on the Constitution of the United States. New York: The Modern Library, Print. 4. University, Yale. "The Avalon Project: The Constitution of New York : April 20, 1777." The Avalon Project: Documents in Law, History and Diplomacy. The Avalon Project, n.d. Web. 20 Feb <