"A Well Regulated Militia…"
Our Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution intending it to be an instrument that would give the Federal Government enough power to be effective in its necessary jobs while at the same time restricting it from usurping powers from the states or restricting the rights of the people. This balance is an extremely hard one to achieve primarily because those in power tend to take more and more power to themselves. Also power corrupts, and government of necessity must have power, therefore is prone to corruption.
There was much debate that the Constitution actually gave too much power to the central government. Despite this concern, the people in the 13 states ratified the Constitution as written and it went into effect on June 21, 1788. The first United States Congress convened in March 1789. One of the new congresses’ first acts was to initiate the amendment process in order to add the Bill of Rights to the Constitution. Why?
The members of Congress did this to reassure the people that their rights would not be infringed by the Federal Government.
The Bill of Rights did not defend all of our rights, just certain ones considered to be vital. In fact the 9th amendment states, "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."
One of the rights considered vital was the right to keep and bear arms. The Second Amendment says, "A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms will not be infringed." At that time, a militia was every able-bodied male subject to be called upon in times of danger or emergency. The militia was not the army, it was the individual citizens.
Our current President is undoubtedly aware of this information, he just doesn’t agree with or approve of the Second Amendment. He has surrounded himself with others who don’t want us to have guns, i.e. Cass Sunstein who wants to ban hunting and have animals represented in courts, and Eric Holder who has stated we need to "really brainwash people against guns".
Obama supported a shutdown of all gun stores within 5 miles of a school or park – an act that would close down 99% of gun stores nationwide. He supported an ammo ban to ban all deer hunting ammunition. He approved discussions with the UN on the gun ban treaty they wanted which would work towards civilian disarmament globally. He told Sarah Brady that his administration was working on gun control "but under the radar." My personal opinion is that ATF’s Fast and Furious Program getting guns to Mexican drug cartels was part of this "under the radar".
As a person Obama would consider a "bitter clinger", clinging to my religion and my guns, I need no further evidence that Obama is anti-gun and would like "gun control" here in the United States. That alone is enough reason for me to vote against him in November.
I can see only two reasons a person would support gun control. One would be politicians in a dictatorship or an oligarchy such as communism or socialism who are afraid of the people they rule. The other would be individuals, probably well intentioned, who think it would make us all safer. Gun control does not have a good history but its advocates ignore that fact.
During the last century, gun control was enacted in many countries. Following the disarming of the civilians, many of these countries had mass murders: 1911 in Turkey – afterwards 1.5 million Armenians executed; 1929 in the Soviet Union – afterwards 20 million dissidents exterminated; 1935 in Communist China – afterwards over 30 million dissidents exterminated; 1964 in Guatemala – afterwards 100,000 Mayan Indians exterminated; 1970 in Uganda – afterwards 300,000 Christians exterminated; Cambodia established gun control in 1956 and when the Khmer Rouge took over in 1975 they exterminated a million unarmed citizens in two years. Even countries that didn’t have the government murdering the unwanted civilians had problems after enacting gun control. Canada wasted $2.7 billion before stopping their long gun registry which never accomplished anything. England passed strict laws in 1998 and had an 89% increase in crime involving guns over the next decade. Australia enacted gun control in 1996 and in one year homicides were up 3.2%, assaults up 8.6%, armed robberies up 44%. Yes, 44% - after all, only the criminals have guns now. So you can easily see that gun control does not make anyone safer. That concept is pure fantasy.
In America, FBI statistics repeatedly show that communities with high gun ownership have the least crime and are the safest communities. There are an estimated 200 to 300 million guns in the United States. Approximately 50% of the people own those guns. Guns are used to prevent crime an estimated 2.5 million times a year, or 6,849 times a day, or once every 13 seconds. Most of these crimes are prevented just by showing the gun. According to Gary Kleck, criminologist, the gun used to prevent a crime is fired less than 1% of the time. In 1982, a survey of male felons in 11 state prisons dispersed across the states found that 40% had decided to not commit a crime because they "knew or believed that the victim was carrying a gun".
The first congress was correct to add the Bill of Rights to the Constitution. It is our duty is to protect and defend it.