Our Founding Fathers placed great emphasis on limited government and the right of the individual. Once the Constitution was near complete, they discussed how to best infuse it with additional guarantees that would serve as powerful safeguards for these individual freedoms. The Bill of Rights was the outcome of this discussion. Unfortunately, few Americans take the time to study our Constitution, and that is a true pity. The document is the result of true genius, which I believe was inspired by God. Perhaps no other document has generated, protected and ensured so much good. Among the guaranteed rights is the “right of the people to keep and bear arms.” This right is now under attack by anti-gun activists throughout the country who suggest that America can and will be safer if we limit the possession of guns to law enforcement.
I understand this argument and believe that it is well-intended. However, I also believe that it is short-sighted and not informed by our history and the world that we live in. Let me return our discussion to The Bill of Rights. These first 10 amendments to the Constitution were added while the several states were deciding whether they would adopt and ratify the Constitution. They were added as a package in 1791 to, among other purposes, convince the leadership of the states that the central government of the United States would not become like the British Crown from which we had just fought a long and difficult war to separate ourselves. For example, the drafters felt that if we retained the right of free speech (First Amendment), the right to keep and bear arms (Second Amendment), the right to be secure in our homes and property from government intrusion (Fourth Amendment) and the right to due process of law (Fifth Amendment), that it would be difficult for any future government to become so powerful as to be capable to enslave our citizenry. They thought through each of these protections and added them as a package because they all complement one another to provide this degree of protection. The loss of any one of these important protections makes us less secure and reduces our protective shield in the face of a well-intended super government that becomes more powerful with the passage of every succeeding generation.
I am a patriot and believe that we are blessed to live in the greatest nation in the history of the world. I believe that we have a good government and a wonderful system. Many of you may look at the grid-locked Congress and the fighting between the current political parties and disagree. However, I could cite many similar times during our history and downplay the current mess. I submit, in total, we are truly blessed to have our national government. So, why do we need the Second Amendment if we have such a grand central government? We need the Second Amendment for the same reason we need the other rights within the Bill of Rights: to keep an honest government honest. I trust my government, but I am not willing to give up my right of free speech which also protects the free press. I believe this protection, like the other constitutional protections, are vital to maintain control over government. Removing any part of this constellation of protections is short-sighted and reduces the distance between “We the People” and a country we do not want to live in.
In addition to the foregoing reality of this gun issue, I also agree with the argument frequently made by those who keep and bear guns legally. They point out that marijuana is illegal, yet those who choose to use this drug are still able to. If guns were made illegal, those who wished to own a gun would inevitably be able to do so. The fact of the matter is that gun laws are necessary to monitor who obtains guns and when they do; this is already preventing millions of criminals from easily obtaining weapons. If you qualify to own a firearm, you must also take additional courses to use and carry said firearm. Furthermore, in order to obtain a concealed weapons permit, the applicant must take an additional in-depth course. Frankly, I believe that those who intend to use firearms to hurt others are typically not going to go through this long and arduous process to carry a concealed weapon legally. These criminals will buy or steal a gun, and perform whatever illegal act they wish to commit. Outlawing weapons altogether would not hamper criminals, only the citizens choosing to obey the laws.
Russell Wagner, a sophomore sports management major and ROTC cadet here at UT, believes, “We must continue to trust our Founding Fathers’ judgment on ‘the right to keep and bear arms’ and we must not take this constitutional right away from our citizens.” He also stated, “All U.S. citizens have and hopefully will continue to have the right to protect themselves and their families.”
The Aurora Theater Massacre is being used to attack the Second Amendment. Yes, this was an absolute tragedy, but we cannot allow the actions of a mentally ill individual to be used as a form of predictive analysis to anticipate the behavior of the remainder of the U.S. population. This is an absurd notion and would generate an absurd result.
The solution is not to eliminate the right to bear arms, but to increase education on this right and to enforce the gun laws that every state and the federal government already have on the books. The reason that our Constitution is so rarely modified is because it was drafted by giants who foresaw the growth and evolution of our nation. Before we consider tampering with their genius, we had better understand the totality of the impact that would result from the change that we propose. Those who propose the revision of the Second Amendment do not understand the far-reaching negative impacts of this loss.
Richard J Whitaker can be reached at richard.whitaker@spartans.ut.edu