Guns and Freedom

"A well regulated militia ..." -- U.S. Constitution, Second Amendment.

   Muzzle loading muskets and single shot, breech loading rifles would be no match for rapid fire, semi-automatic assault weapons available over-the-counter today, or that can be purchased at gun shows immediately, without a background check or a waiting period.
   But single shot weaponry was the only kind available to Americans in the 18th Century, at the time the Constitution was adopted. Moreover, relatively few citizens could afford a firearm of any kind, much less collect an arsenal. Mass production, using standardized interchangeable parts, didn't happen until later, led in part by Samuel Colt, who received a patent for his first revolver in 1836. And even that weapon held only six bullets.
   The gun industry (Read: NRA) and its supporters speak at great length about the need for self protection and "the right of the people to keep and bear arms." But in doing so, they ignore the first part of the Second Amendment, which specifies that a "well regulated militia (is) essential to the security of a free state."
   The key words, then, are state, militia, and well regulated. The gun lobby ignores all three concepts. Instead, it aims solely at the so-called "right" of any and all individuals to own as many weapons as they like, of as many types as they choose.
   At the time of American independence, few people actually owned a firearm, and those who did were expected to be part of a state militia. A state did not supply weapons; rather, it relied on those who did to join the militia for protection of the entire community.
   There were, of course, hunters who used their guns to supply food for their families. Many still do. But many states do not allow automatic or semiautomatic rifles for hunting. Single shot weapons only. Moreover, some states in heavily populated areas ban the use of rifles when hunting. Shotguns only, since their discharge travels only a short distance, typically less than 50 yards.
   The only use for assault weapons, therefore, is just that. To assault people. And this should be reserved for use by a well organized militia, sponsored and controlled as an essential part of the security of a free state. 
   
    In the aftermath of the Orlando, Fla., massacre, a leading spokesman for a gun owners association claimed that the AR 15 weapon, like the one used in the night club murders, is not dangerous, because it is only semi-automatic, not fully automatic. That, however, is no consolation to the families of the 50 dead victims and the dozens more who were injured. A single shot can be just as fatal as multiple rounds from an assault weapon.
   In addition, in his interview with a radio station in Ireland, Richard Feldman, the American president of the Independent Firearms Owners Association, insisted that if guns were taken away from the police in Dublin, crime would increase. But when he was reminded that police in that country do not carry guns, there was no reply. Instead, he called the radio questioner "ignorant," and slammed down the phone.
   So who's the ignoramus?

   It has become popular in America for some politicians to claim that the only way to stop bad guys with guns is by good guys with guns. But how is one to know the difference, especially if many people in crowded places such as night clubs, theaters and shopping malls also have guns?
   Will there be some rule that the bad guys must wear black hats, so the good guys, who would wear white hats, would be able to identify them? That may have worked in old-time Hollywood movies, but not likely today.  And how to protect innocent bystanders from crossfire of opposing shooters, even if some are police? The off-duty policeman in the dark, crowded Colorado theater, scene of another mass shooting, knew better than to draw his weapon.