NRA and the Second Amendment

Part IV

Let every person be subject to the governing authorities;

for there is no authority except from God....Therefore, whoever

resists authority resists what God has appointed, and those

who resist will incur judgment.

Romans 13:1-2

"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."

Second Amendment

United States Constitution

The foundation of the NRA's gun advocacy is in the Bill of Rights-Second Amendment, adopted on 15 December 1791 in Philadelphia.  The force of the amendment is in its interpretation. Historically, there have been two basic interpretations: 1) Gun rights within the context of a militia; 2) Individual rights.  The NRA stresses individual rights.  We need to understand both interpretations.

MILITIA:  What is a militia?  To quote Jack Anderson, "It is a body of citizens enrolled for discipline as a military force but not engaged in actual service except in emergencies, as distinguished from regular troops or a standing army."  It is with this understanding that six former U.S. Attorney Generals signed a letter which stated:

For over 200 years the federal courts have unanimously determined that the 

Second Amendment concerns only the arming of the people in

service to the organized state militia.  It does not guarantee

immediate access to guns for private purposes.

INDIVIDUAL:  The NRA contends that the 2nd Amendment grants permission for an individual to purchase, possess and use almost any weapon with no legal restrictions.  To support their argument, the NRA turns to the 2008 Supreme Court decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, which overturned a Washington D.C. law that banned handguns for self defense.  The court said the 2nd Amendment protects an individual right to possess firearms for lawful use, such as self defense.  The result of this decision was this pronouncement by Wayne LaPierre of the NRA: 

Our Founding Fathers wrote and intended the 2nd Amendment

to be an individual right.  The Supreme Court  has now acknowledged it.

 The 2nd Amendment as an individual right now becomes a permanent

part of American Constitutional law.

It is important, however, to look at the details of the ruling. Writing for the majority, Justice Scalia was careful to state that the Second Amendment is not absolute, and a wide range of gun control laws remain "presumptively lawful", including laws that :  1) Prohibit carrying concealed weapons; 2)  Prohibit firearm possession by felons, the mentally ill; 3) Possession in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings; 4) Ban firearms that are "dangerous and unusual"; 5) Impose "conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms."; 6) Regulate firearm storage to prevent accidents.

Notice the caveats within the ruling.  There is no carte blanche individual right permission.  Therefore, laws can be written that provide for the "domestic tranquility and general welfare".  The NRA, however, will continue to push the individual right button as the true meaning within the Second Amendment. This bias needs to be rightfully challenged.  To quote former Supreme Court Chief Justice Warren Burger in referring to the NRA's Second Amendment myth, calling it "one of the greatest pieces of fraud, I repeat the word fraud, on the American people by any special interest group than I have ever seen in my lifetime." He continued: "Prior to Heller, the Supreme Court never recognized that individuals had an individual right to keep and bear arms".  Significantly, the dissenting opinion to Heller reinforced the historical opinion that supported guns for use only in the context of  militia and further stated that the decision does not limit government's authority to regulate civilian use in possession of firearms.

Recently, an editorialist for GUNS AND AMMO magazine (December 2013, p. 120) commented on the interpretation of the 2nd Amendment. Quoting the amendment, Dick Metcalf wrote: "Note carefully: Those last four words say 'shall not be infringed'.  They do not say 'shall not be regulated'. 'Well regulated' is, in fact, the initial criterion of the amendment itself." The response by subscribers was so strongly opposed to his comments that he was relieved and replaced of writing responsibility.

I conclude there is significant weight to Constitutionally regulate  the sale, purchase, and use of firearms.  Furthermore, the NRA has fraudulently abused the letter and spirit of the 2nd Amendment to justify its position of  non-regulated individual right to bear arms.  The result has been catastrophic for the United States.

In an article published in the DULUTH NEWS TRIBUNE, Monday, December 9, 2013, State District Court Judge, Mark Munger wrote: "We require duck and goose hunters to plug their shotguns.  They only get three chances to down a bird. Why do we protect migratory waterfowl better than our children?".

The NRA likes to quote from the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution to justify their positions.  Here is what they leave out: "...establish justice, insure domestic tranquility,...promote the general welfare...." And "all people have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."  There is more than ample justification for those in authority (as Paul writes) to write laws that guarantee good order.  Indeed, it is significant that the verses before and following Romans 13:1-7 speak of love.  He is saying that the prime function of government is to insure LOVE.   Proper laws and regulations concerning the sale, purchase, and use of firearms can and must point the way to greater love.  Failure to regulate only results in the judgment of death.

Peace!

Ron Letnes