I thought that would get some attention!
Before I go any further let me state beyond any confusion…I am NOT an advocate of super restrictive gun laws. Got That?
We know by watching our favorite news station that gun violence seems to be on the rise….and of course when that happens the conversation turns to some sort of gun control…..and then the debate starts and the insults and the lies and then total break down of any constructive dialog is gone.
Does that sort of sum up the never ending gun conversation?
Did you know that gun deaths are rising across the the US except in the two states with restrictive gun laws……
U.S. gun deaths have have surged over the last several years, according to a new study published in the journal Health Affairs.
Since 1999, researchers from the University of Michigan found that the annual rate of people killed by firearms had remained relatively stable, hovering around 10.4 deaths per 100,000. But from 2015 to 2017, a new pattern emerged, and the rate began to skyrocket, ultimately increasing by around 14 percent over the previous 15 years.
Nearly one-fifth of all people living in the United States who died at the hands of a firearm since 1999 were killed over a three-year period.
The study reported that only two states, California and New York, and the District of Columbia saw firearm mortality rates decline across most demographic groups (such as race, sex and age) in recent years. This is notable considering these jurisdictions’ relatively strict gun laws.
If you actually read the article then you probably have an opinion….right or wrong…..
How about a history of gun rights in this country…..
To say the history of gun rights is contentious would be an understatement. It is a history that has become guided by political ideology and cultural attitudes more than by facts.
For more than a decade, I have researched, written, debated, and discussed the history of gun rights, and its legal ramifications. I am not anti-gun, anti-Second Amendment, associated with communism, or some other negative stereotype used by gun-rights advocates to “pigeon hole” anyone who does not wholly subscribe to the tenets of gun-rights theology.
There’s a lot going around about the Second Amendment. Some on the left have been spreading a little rumor that it isn’t necessarily about protecting any right of the individual. Some say it doesn’t hold water compared to the government’s ideas on ensuring public safety.
Let’s not forget that the 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,” isn’t our only clue to determine what the founders thought of the right to bear arms. They’ve left behind plenty of writings which outline the purpose of the 2nd Amendment.
The Founding Fathers Explain The Second Amendment — This Says it ALL
One last thought…..
Many people find this obvious. It’s hard to imagine what else the Second Amendment could possibly be intended to do. James Madison wrote the Second Amendment in the aftermath of a bloody war for independence from a tyrannical empire. The first shots of that war were fired to resist disarmament. Can anyone truly believe that Madison wrote the Second Amendment with, say, hunting or target shooting in mind? It’s a preposterous notion.
But, let’s suppose that we’re not sure what “arms” the Second Amendment refers to. How might we figure out what the authors of our Constitution and Bill of Rights were thinking when they used the term “arms?” Were they thinking about “weapons of war,” or something else?
The Right to Bear Which Arms? – 2A Interpretation and the Federalist Papers
You have mine…now what about yours?
I Read, I Wrote, You Know
“Lego Ergo Scribo”