“A gun is like a parachute: If you need one and don’t have one, you won’t be needing one again.”-Anonymous
Indeed, I have previously suggested the following: “The anti-gunner is an anti-gunner until their life is on the line and there is a need for lethal force to defend against criminal tyranny. Only then do the constitutional protections of the 2nd Amendment become passionate for the anti-gunner because of the fact that they are faced with criminal tyranny in the instant moment. But, because they are an anti-gunner, they have no option but to cower, beg or negotiate for their safety in the face of criminal tyranny. Remember, there is no honor in cowering and begging for your safety if and when the unlikely event of criminal tyranny becomes an instant moment. It is always a better option to defend yourself and live out all of your Constitutional protections.”
This contribution to Constitutionally-speaking.com on the 2nd Amendment is focused on the fears of the anti-gunner.
But before I address those fears, I also submit to you the following: like any right under the U.S. Constitution, not one individual right is obligatory. You don’t have to pray, vote or speak or sing. Therefore, you don’t have to own or possess a firearm. However, if you choose to embrace of the 2nd Amendment, you must do so with the understanding that the embrace of the 2nd Amendment and the rights, privileges, and immunities with “keeping and bearing” arms for self-defense for the law-abiding citizen carries with those rights privileges, and immunities a tremendous non-negotiable, non-delegable, non-assignable, legal obligation and legal responsibility whereby if you fail in your legal obligation and responsibility, you are likely to be charged with a crime. It’s just that simple. It’s also just that serious. If you choose to “keep and bear arms” as is your 2nd Amendment constitutional right, remember it is SAFETY FIRST when taking on the huge responsibility of accessing firearms, and or the enjoyment of, or the conscious choice to realize the full embrace for this very precious express constitutional right. The right to “keep and bear” arms for self-defense comes with a non-negotiable, non-delegable, non-assignable, legal obligation of learning the proper safety measures for carrying, and storing (like using your gun locks and purchasing a gun safe for storing like a responsible owner because that is what responsible gun owners do), knowing the concealed weapons laws of your state (assuming that your state allows for concealed carry), knowing the self-defense statutes of your state (assuming your state legislature has provided a statute like Florida Statute 776.013 the so-called “Stand Your Ground” statute) if required, getting the proper training from certified professional, understanding the maintenance and cleaning that is needed for keeping and storing (if you cannot do it yourself, then pay for the service at your local gun store) and learn, learn, learn these and other safety measures that are relevant to keeping your status the same as it is now; and that is as a law-abiding citizen gun owner.
I also wanted to speak directly to opinions produced or written in the black-American press that have argued for increased gun control and who have asked questions like, in the tragic case of Kansas City Chiefs linebacker Jovan Belcher and the mother of his child Kasandra Perkins who are both dead (and my condolences go out to both families for their losses) whereby a sports writer suggested rhetorically that “somebody should have been asking Belcher why he needed to own eight guns when he lived in a Kansas City suburb.” Well, the simple legal answer was absent some legal restriction, or other facts that we are not aware of that have not been reported by the media, apparently Jovan Belcher had the constitutional right to do so and the constitutional right own as many as he wanted just as all law-abiding citizens have that right absent some legal restriction to own. Make no mistake, the Jovan Belcher / Kasandra Perkins story is a tragic one and one that I cannot fathom being incidental to the sorrow and mourning that will go on for some time, whether I was a direct family member or an extended family member. I mourn now as a member of the family of citizens of America. However, the presumption that because a law-abiding citizen owns eight guns (or more) that amount (or any amount) should not be presumed be “bad”, or “nutty” or “paranoid” or illegal is, put lightly, pompous, and it does not matter where one lives, whether it is the “suburbs of Kansas City” or not. A law abiding citizen can own as many firearms as they choose to own. Indeed, they are law-abiding citizens.
Gun control advocates are in effect calling for an infringement upon an express constitutional right. That’s what the gun control measures in effect are. The “making it harder” for law-abiding citizens to effectuate the express constitutional right of the 2ndamendment is an infringement. That’s what “making it harder” means. Absent the requirements of background checks, and mental health background checks, legislatively “making it harder” is an infringement, period. I see no call for “making it harder” for the population to consume liquor. I see no call for “making it harder” for the law-abiding individual citizen to demand that the government be required to have search warrant to search your home, or for “making it easier” for the police state and government to “stop and frisk” because you “look like you might” be up to criminal activity because you are walking down the street. My argument is to focus on the point, to focus on the fact, that gun control stands for the argument that the express constitutional right of the 2ndamendment should be harder to embrace, and should be harder to effectuate for law-abiding citizens who have done nothing criminally and that those law-abiding citizens be subjected to more restrictions, and that the 2nd amendment should be harder to embrace, and should be harder to effectuate for law-abiding citizens who have no mental health issues in their medical history or family medical history. You, as a gun control advocate are in effect; declaring that I, as a lawful law-abiding citizen should be affected by what you believe is a corrective measure on my constitutional right because of the negligent criminal actions of another. I submit to you the following; that proposition is un-American in and of itself.
Do not think for one minute that I am not appalled at the carnage in Newton, Connecticut that I respectfully refer to and call “the Day of the Unthinkable.” To have that happen, as it has, leaves me somber as I write this submission this evening and my condolences go out to those families.
However, I also humbly submit to you that the most peaceful international urban area is located in Pyongyang North Korea. Their citizens are not armed, they have none of the freedoms of the constitution that we have guaranteed here in the United States, and the fear that they have is the fear of their government who imposes its will on its people every day. They do not fear each other, other than fearing that one of them may tell the government something about another them to get them arrested.
I have a few guns, and some of them are semi-automatics with over 10 round capacities, that I use only for self-defense and I am good with them. I don’t hunt. I have them for self-defense. I am a black-American there is not one right, not one privilege, and not one immunity that I am entitled to as an American citizen of this country under this constitution that I am not going to embrace instead of leaving it on the table and not use or abdicate to the state like some apparently feel comfortable doing. It does not make me feel tough. It makes me smart. I mean, everything, all rights, privileges, and immunities guaranteed to me as a citizen, from voting, to privacy (9th Amendment), to the 1st Amendment and I am damn for sure not going to acquiesce and support the erosion of the 13th Amendment nor the 4th, 5th or 6th. Moreover, since some citizens who are bigots have them (high capacity guns), then why should I not have them too? I often asked my late mother the question, growing up looking at history with my World Book Encyclopedia and the pictures of lynched black-American males, why did this happen and where were the police to stop this ugly killing? She told me that the police would not come and possibly the police were involved with the killing of these black-Americans. So, since that was true, it serves as a rational basis for me to not be afraid of embracing every single right afforded to us as American citizens of this nation under this constitution including the express right to keep and bear arms. Indeed, in my humble opinion only a fool would not.
Therefore, I ask the anti-gunner to admit the following points: