Today’s post is sure to divide readers. That’s okay. Sometimes we need to discuss topics that are divisive. As we do, I want to acknowledge that I respect opinions that are opposite of my own. I respect anyone’s right to an opposing view. I ask that you do the same for me. If you’re not willing to respect my right to have an equal and valid opposing point of view, perhaps you should look inside yourself and evaluate what freedom means to you.
First, I am a 2A advocate. In fact, I am a bit of a 2A absolutist. I believe that every person who is deemed safe to walk around freely in society has the right to self defense through any means they wish to employ. With that, they are responsible for any collateral damage their defense of self or others inflicts. For example, if you choose to use grenades to defend your home, but injure, maim, or kill a neighbor with your choice of weapon, then you bear complete civil and criminal liability for your choice.
Setting that aside, we don’t only have a personal right to defend ourselves, our loved ones, and our property (yes, we have a clear right to defend property); we have a collective right to defend our way of life from a government run amok. That collective right means we have been endowed by our Founding Fathers to carry forward their efforts in ensuring that we remain a free and representative republic. Any other reading of the Second Amendment misses two fundamental points.
- Our Founding Fathers followed centuries-old English common law that stipulated our natural right to self defense and defense of others.
- Having just thrown off the yoke of a tyrannical government, and relying on pre-political rights for mankind to not only defend itself but to choose its method of government, our personal and collective rights were enshrined against government encroachment.
Using those two fundamental premises, I’d like to dive into my second point. We have a means within our Constitution to change portions of that Supreme Law that we believe need to be updated to reflect our changing social conditions. That process is through Amendment. It’s designed to be difficult and require a supermajority to ensure that only changes universally agreed upon would survive the process.
Attempting to modify, undermine, prohibit, or otherwise alter the meaning of any of the rights espoused directly in the Bill of Rights—or guaranteed to the States and the people through the express limitations on the federal government in the Constitution itself—is something we should not take lightly. Whether this takes the form of Executive Order, Congressional Act, or bureaucratic mandate, they are all unconstitutional to one degree or another. There is only one process for changing the Constitution. I mentioned it above. This simply cannot be overstated. Were our rights and freedoms subject to the whims of elected officials minus the required supermajority via Amendment, they would not be rights and freedoms at all.
They would be nothing but mere privileges, afforded to those who passed some barrier to entry AND maintained their privileged status.
My third point circles back to my original topic. A quick web search showed that we have both a gun and ammunition shortage in our country. With varying estimates, there is some percentage (we will call it “X”) who are first-time gun buyers. The events of the last year have demonstrated to these buyers that they should not trust their freedom and safety to the government. You may disagree with how these folks have responded to the madness of 2020. What you cannot reasonably disagree with is that those first-time buyers suddenly felt compelled to consider that they alone could defend their selves, their loved ones, and their property.
This should give us a national pause.
No longer can a person reasonably assert that guns are only for the uncivilized, the uncouth, the uninformed, etc. (Not that it was ever a reasonable assertion, but this past year has put the argument to bed.)
I have been called many things for proudly advocating for our 2A rights. Even during the madness of the last year. I have lost ‘friends’ on social media as a result. I have family members who rarely speak to me because of my politics. It’s okay. That’s their right and prerogative.
I still contend that we are freer and safer than any other nation on Earth. At least for a while longer. Clearly, there is a growing number of Americans who agree with this, as evidenced by the “X” percentage of first-time gun buyers (mentioned above).
Our freedom and rights are never more than one generation from being taken. As I previously mentioned, one of our pre-political human rights is to choose the form of government we want. I hope we continue to want a representative republic. I hope we continue to want free, fair, and honest elections that we can reliably trust. The election in November has certainly shaken that trust. It’s up to us to insist that our government answer to their bosses—us. It’s up to us to insist that our freedoms remain our sole domain, jealously guarded, and absolutely demanded. It’s up to us to be the check against a government that we trust less and less each day. Finally, it’s up to us to understand that we alone can return our society to a place of peace and prosperity that cannot be found through government mandate. If we don’t take accountability and responsibility to ensure these expectations are met, we will be left with a deeply divided nation that splits into factions. We will be left with The Borderlands. As always, this has been the World According to Chris.