Limits to the Right to Bare Arms

As a young girl growing up in New Orleans I was totally ignorant of friends and families owning firearms. Perhaps some did, but I did not know. It was not polite dinner talk. It was assumed that gangsters had guns, but not good people. We trusted our police to keep us safe and for the most part they did, even in the days of depression, prohibition, and war. So, how did we get to where we are now, she asks rhetorically.

In the earliest days of European immigration to North America war-like conflict was present. Some Native Americans (our earliest illegal immigrants) were hostile to the new wave of illegal immigrants. The immigrants themselves were hostile to each other. Emerging towns and eventually colonies developed civilian militia’s to provide for the common defense. These militias were not professional soldiers. They were men (Yes, men. Our civil liberties still have not caught up with reality.) who were asked to unyoke their oxen, put down their plows, and to provide their own weapons and ammunition to rise and fend off the threat. They operated much as today’s volunteer fireman in small communities, each man engaged in some means of providing for his family, then dropping everything to respond to a threat. These militia grew from 1512 when first developed to 1774. By 1774, each colony, or state, had their own militia where every able bodied man between the age of 16 and 60 was expected to provide military service. Property and wealth determined rank as there was no professional military, no full-time soldier. These were part-time citizen armies following part-time citizen officers.

In 1775 the Continental Congress created the Continental Army, the first truly trained American militia. George Washington was named Commander-in-Chief and served as General. The purpose of the army was to coordinate the efforts of the militias of various states. The Continental Army was disbanded in 1783 after the Treaty with Paris. America won its independence from Britain using citizen armies, or militias, then disbanded its only full-time, professionally trained army when the war was over.

During and before the Revolutionary War, Colonists were forced to house and feed British soldiers. When these soldiers entered a community or home it was their practice to confiscate all weapons so that the militia could not arise and fight them. The only army America had was its various militias. Disarm militias and we were without defense, without an army.

So, in 1789 the First Continental Congress proposed 12 amendments to the US Constitution. Amendments 1 and 2 were never ratified. Amendments 3 to 12 were and became the first ten amendments to our constitution, our Bill of Rights. The first amendment defined freedoms of religion, speech, the press, and peaceable assembly.

The second amendment read, “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.” Clearly, this amendment was proposed at a time in our country when we did not have a professional standing army. All we had was a militia. To maintain militias, who had to provide their own weapons, this amendment makes sense. This amendment provided the only US Army we had in the late 1700’s. Without an armed citizen militia we were basically defenseless.

The third amendment sheds even more light on the contextual nature of the amendments: “No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.” These were wounds from the Revolutionary War and we were not going to let them happen again. Read the 2nd and 3rd amendments together in the context in which they were written and they make great sense. Never shall our people be forced to house an army, never shall our men be forced to give up their arms because we need them to simultaneously serve as our Army/

This is not a treatise on American History or the Bill of Rights. It simply is the observation that amendments numbers 2 and 3 were clearly ratified in the late 1700’s because of our notion of the army and what we would not tolerate in terms of army or militia behavior. Period. Nowhere in this context was there a vision of a full time professional standing Army, Navy, Marines, Coast Guard and National Guard, (which traces its heritage to the colonial militias.) Nowhere in these two amendments could the founding fathers have pictured military bases at home and around the world, much less an Air Force Academy, Naval Academy, and West Point who produce trained officers for a full-time military. Nowhere in this context was there any idea that our citizens would be protected by full time, professional police and armed forces, no notion that the military was now an honored career, as is law enforcement. Nowhere in these two amendments could the founding fathers have had a notion of arming citizens with a full time army and law enforcement standing guard 24/7. One could argue that amendments 2 and 3 could be amended out of the constitution and no significant rights would be diminished from the founding fathers point of view today.

I learned all the above in my public school days taking Civics. That was before right wing politicians would label such learning as socialist or communist because it does not fit their view of the world. Only problem is, it is our civic history, like it or not, and learning about the context of the founding of this great nation is important as we make critical decisions today. We cannot make such decisions unless we can with reason examine our position and that of others. Such a skill is rapidly disappearing.

And for those who argue that hunting is important, and self defense is important they should recognize that if venison is really good to eat someone would herd deer like cattle and you could buy it in Kroger. They should also look to Britain and Australia and Canada where possession of weapons is severely restricted, the crime rate much lower, and the frequency of citizens shooting other citizens is very, very low. We are the most armed nation in the world, and we kill each other at a higher rate than any other nation in the civilized world.

And for those of you who believe that you must remain armed to defend yourself against your own government, I am so sorry you did not graduate from high school and learn about our Constitution and our representative democracy.

And for those of you who say when guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns I shall retort when drugs are outlawed only outlaws will deal drugs, when rape is outlawed only outlaws will commit rape, when theft is outlawed only outlaws will steal, etc., etc. etc. In other words, that is not an argument that is a statement of fact.

And for those of you who say that you’ll give up your guns when it is pried from your cold dead hand, I say why admit you are an outlaw?

The NRA is wrong. Individuals owning weapons are a bigger threat to our citizens than almost any disease we can name.

It is time to give up our guns.

I did not mislabel the title, though I chose a homophone for fun: If you want to talk about your right to bare arms let’s talk spaghetti strap dresses and tube tops, both of which are restricted at public schools with hardly an outcry from anyone, much less NRA and hunters.

The right to bare arms as a constitutional right makes no more sense to me than the right to bear arms.