* * *
Getting Back to Issues
Really, to properly write this
article, its subject matter should be thoroughly researched and footnoted in
great detail. I do not have the time nor
energy to do that so I will merely present my thoughts as to why the Second
Amendment to our Constitution should be repealed. I apologize for any errors, but they are
unintentional. This is just a blog
posting and not a mini-thesis.
By the 1780’s it was clear
that the Articles of Confederation were not holding our new nation which
declared its independence in 1776 together.
We needed something stronger and so a convention was held which produced
the Constitution of the United States of America, the same document which to
this day is the basis of our government.
Passing it in 1789 was not an easy job.
There were trade-offs and compromises among the thirteen States, the
most significant being those allowing the continuance of the institution of
slavery in a nation with a strong central government which did not entirely
agree with that.
After the revolution, the
Continental Army had been disbanded but now, officially, there would be a
national army. Those States where slavery was a dominant part of their economy
feared that the Federal government and its armed forces would someday take
action against the continuance of slavery.
Without some guarantee to protect the institution of slavery from being
abolished by such force, the slave-holding States would not support the new
Constitution and the new nation would have fallen apart, as the British had
predicted it would.
Recognizing this problem,
Alexander Hamilton and James Madison worked out a series of compromises which included in a “Bill of Rights” amended to the new Constitution. The second of
these amendments was worded as follows:
“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
‘free States’ whose ‘security’ was the topic of this amendment were the
slave-holding States. They wanted a
guarantee that if they had to raise their own armies, their ‘well regulated
militias,’ to oppose a Federal army which might be used to force them to end
the institution of slavery, the citizens recruited into their militias would be
able to bring weapons along with them. Thus, they feared a Federal law which
would take away the right of these citizens to possess those weapons. Well, they got their guarantee and they voted
to approve the new Constitution and the nation was saved from collapse. Supposedly, everybody was satisfied.
But
not really. Seventy-one years later, the
continuing national debate about the expansion of slavery westward boiled over
into the Civil War. The slave-holding States, which formed their own
“Confederacy,” were able to raise an army to battle the Federal army, which it
did for four years, resulting in over 400,000 deaths. Initially, the weapons of some of the
Confederacy’s State militias were those which the Second Amendment allowed their
citizens to possess because it guaranteed the right of the people to keep and
bear Arms.
After
the war, the defeated seceding States were ultimately returned into the Union
and since then, we have truly been the “United” States of America.
The
Second Amendment’s real purpose did not remain an issue thereafter, since any
State militias, eventually taking the form of State National Guard units,
provided their own weapons to those citizens who became members. A recruit didn’t have to bring his own weapon.
But many American gun owners were comforted by the final fourteen words of the
Second Amendment, ignoring its first thirteen words, and came to believe their
right to own a weapon was a “constitutional right.” In more modern times, the National Rifle Association
took this position and lobbied extensively for it.
Finally,
in 2008, when the right of a local government to restrict gun ownership in an
effort to reduce local gun violence was challenged, the Supreme Court, in an
opinion written by the late Justice Antonin Scalia, took the position that the
right to own a gun had nothing to do with being called up to serve in a militia
and in effect, ignored all but the final fourteen words of the Second
Amendment, forgetting about the purpose and origin of the Amendment as described above.
This was the decision which has permanently left the hands of
Justices Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, Kennedy and Alito, like those of Lady
Macbeth, drenched in blood.
 |
| Lady Macbeth's hands |
Undoubtedly,
some future Supreme Court will reverse Antonin Scalia's tortured language in the 2008
decision (District of Columbia vs. Heller) and put us back on the road to
sanity in regard to passing laws to reduce gun violence. That decision was a political one rather than
one based on ‘stare decisis,’ the traditional dependence of Court decisions on
prior decisions.
Right
now, the Second Amendment, the original purpose of which no longer exists, has
morphed into something which serves to prevent the Congress from effectively
dealing with the gun violence which daily manifests itself in individual local shootings
as well as the more organized efforts by those with a violent agenda such as
the white nationalist movement. In view of this, the Congress, and States as
well, should indeed be able to pass laws that ‘infringe’ on the right of
citizens to own firearms, actions presently blocked by the Second
Amendment.
Those
laws, and local and State laws, must always allow for the possession of weapons
for hunting, agricultural purposes, sport activities and reasonable
self-protection, but as for the
Second Amendment itself, it is now obsolete, unnecessary and in the interest of
reducing gun violence, should be repealed. Certainly,
after that repeal, a new Amendment should be passed including such reasonable
guarantees for all Americans.
Repeal and replacement of the
Second Amendment will involve a process which will take many years, including
ratification by three quarters of the States.
Meanwhile, until that day comes (which might not be during the lifetime of anyone
reading this, if ever), we should hope that Courts at all levels will rule
favorably on local, state and national laws which are aimed at reducing gun violence.
Jack Lippman
* * *
Impeach Now! Being an unadmitted asset to Russian
interference in our elections, obstructing a Department of Justice investigation and being a “dog whistler” to white nationalists who
have murdered Americans is enough to constitute high crimes and misdemeanors. Republicans in the Senate, once the evidence
is made public, will find it impossible to disagree, and if they do, they will never again be elected to any office. Even if the Senate doesn't "convict," the court of public opinion will.
Looking Around Carefully … in New Places
Whenever I am in the boarding
area in an airport, waiting for my flight to start taking on passengers, I am
in the habit of looking around at the people waiting to board. Do any look like potential terrorists? I have been doing this since “9/11” and I
suspect that many other also have gotten into the habit of doing the same thing
almost automatically.
I once spotted an unattended
backpack adjacent to an empty bench at a gate at LaGuardia Airport in New York. After about ten minutes, without anyone
sitting down next to it, I went to the counter and pointed it out to airline
personnel there. When I boarded the
plane, fifteen minutes later, the unattended bag was still sitting there. So much for Homeland Security. They probably are bored stiff with reports of
unattended bags which turn out to have been accidently left behind by someone
boarding an earlier flight from that gate. One day, one will explode. But I digress.
Lately, I seem to be looking
around at people in supermarkets, entering movie theatres and at other public
events the same way I look at those boarding my flights at airports. It should not be that way in the United
States of America. But it is.
JL
* * *
They Got it Done Without Email or Blogs
In the years leading up to the
signing of the Declaration of Independence and the American Revolution,
patriots did not have email, blogs and websites on which to state their
arguments and gather a following. But
they did have “Committees of Correspondence” which served that purpose and
actually provided an organizational framework for the new nation’s government
once independence was declared on July 4, 1776.
 |
| Committees of Corrspondence - Handwritten Stuf! Imagine if they had possessed IPads? |
If they had been able to access the
internet, it would have been easier for patriots to organize events and demonstrations such as the Boston Tea
Party, a protest against taxation without representation. All they had to depend on were word of mouth and
written communications. But it worked! Highly organized “Committees
of Correspondence,” managed the handwritten tools which did the job in those
days and which Email, blogs and websites would do today. They served to unite the colonies, distant from one another. Ideas do not change. Only the means of transmitting them do. Check out “Committees of Correspondence” on
the internet. Start off by clicking on https://www.bostonteapartyship.com/committees-of-correspondence.
JL
* * *
Impeach Now! Being an unadmitted asset to Russian interference in our elections, obstructing a Department of Justice investigation and being a “dog whistler” to white nationalists who have murdered Americans is enough to constitute high crimes and misdemeanors. Republicans in the Senate, once the evidence is made public, will find it impossible to disagree, and if they do, they will never again be elected to any office. Even if the Senate doesn't "convict," the court of public opinion will.
* * *
* * *
Diverting Efforts from the True Cause of Gun Violence
 |
| A "Loner" |
The emphasis on “mental
health’ in identifying potential mass murderers, particularly those committing
these acts in the name of a philosophy or organization, is close to being a
waste of time and resources. Emphasizing it diverts efforts from other ways of reducing gun violence. It would mean asking every teacher in every
elementary, middle and high school in this country to make a list of those in
their classes who impress them as being “loners,” being “strange,” harboring
grudges, having no friends and possibly being the object of bullying or being
bullies themselves. And what about those
beyond school age? Would employers be
asked to make similar lists?
All this would be highly
subjective and involve pinpointing people whose behavior is far, far below the
level which would call for some sort of professional intervention. (Even
keeping tabs on people of all ages whose behavior has already resulted in some
sort of intervention … referred to as red flag situations? … would be a herculean task.) How large would those new lists be? Ten million more names? Twenty million? Your guess is as good as mine but wouldn’t it
be easier just to get rid of the guns?
The real answer is repeal of the Second Amendment as discussed above. Then Congress would do what it has to do.
JL
* * *
We’re Big in Kiev
Google Blogspot, through which
this blog is produced, provides statistics to its bloggers. This past week, as has happened frequently in
the past, a large number of hits on this blog landed on my posting of May 10, 2012,
titled “Europe Says No to Austerity.” Over the years, 1,522 hits have been recorded
on that posting! Unbelievable!
 |
| At least 31 Blog Followers Live Here |
The lead article, which I
wrote, talks about European economic problems and how their resolution might be
a benchmark for the United States. This
was written during the Obama-Romney presidential campaign. Hits on this posting, by far the most popular
one ever included on the blog, always come from Europe. Last week 31 Ukrainians checked out that posting! That’s the way it always has been, with its
audience coming in batches from one nation or another. I would guess my posting appears in the
“reading list” of university courses somewhere or other. Or maybe, it is being copied and used as a
term paper. (The blog can be translated
into any language!) Recently, I re-read
what I wrote nine years ago and honestly, it’s pretty good stuff for a
non-economist lay person! Check it out!
JL
Impeach Now! Being an unadmitted asset to Russian interference in our elections, obstructing a Department of Justice investigation and being a “dog whistler” to white nationalists who have murdered Americans is enough to constitute high crimes and misdemeanors. Republicans in the Senate, once the evidence is made public, will find it impossible to disagree, and if they do, they will never again be elected to any office. Even if the Senate doesn't "convict," the court of public opinion will.
No comments:
Post a Comment