Home » Random » Me And My 2nd Amendment Right

Me And My 2nd Amendment Right

bill-of-rightsI usually don’t make posts pertaining to political issues one way or another. If you love me, you love me regardless of my views, and respect them as I respect and love you. Right? That’s the way friendships work.

However, I find that my 2nd Amendment right is something I want to keep. And I want to share with you my reasoning:

First, and foremost, let me state the The Constitution is a limitation on the government, not the individual. Therefore, those rights are given to each and every one of the US citizens and cannot be taken away by the government. If we want change, we have to collectively raise our voice and  3/4 of the states have to approve in order to make changes to those rights. It’s not unheard of. It can be done. Case in point: The 18th Amendment is the only amendment to be repealed in all US history.

The 2nd Amendment reads:

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.

What does this mean?

This has been the question for God knows how long. Is it the state’s right? Is it an individual’s right? Personally, I believe it to be EVERYONE’S right, State, state, and individual. It is there to protect the people against a rogue government, much like what the government of King George did to the colonists. And how can we do that without guns? You may say the state “militia” means the Army, Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps, Coast Guard are the “militia” in here. Or, you may say that each state has their own “militia” called the National Guard. But when you think about it, who actually runs the military? Or the  National Guard? The government, that’s who. So how can a government organization rise up and protect the people when they are taking orders from our government?

That’s where the individual comes in.

Let’s dissect the sentence, shall we?

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State” : Quite obvious The Founders saw the need for an organized body to protect  their country. The word “state” invokes the 50 United States in most of the population, I would venture. However, studying politics, I’ve come to understand the word “state” to mean an organized community living under a unified political system. They can be sovereign, such as whole nations, or they can be part of a greater structure, such as our united states. You could also argue that the word state could reference the condition of a person or thing with respect to circumstances or attributes (e.g. mental state, state of being, gaseous state).

So, the “security of a free state” could mean one of three things: 1) security of self, 2) security of the place you reside, or 3) security of the sovereign state, the nation. Whatever it is, it boils down to safety.

Now, notice the use of commas. I believe this is the reason everyone argues over whether it’s the state’s right or the individual’s right. But it’s plain as day in my eyes. There’s no comma used after the word people. The phrase “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms” is complete and in tact.

If you remove the parenthetical elements ( being necessary to the security of a free State), then we can apply the “elements in a series” rule. We would have the militia AND the individual’s rights to keep and bear arms. And neither shall be infringed, as stated in the final phrase of the amendment.

The Supreme Court never addressed, probably never wanted to address, the 2nd Amendment wording, thus never ruling whether it was a state’s right or an individual’s right … at least, not until 2008 when they made a decision on District of Columbia v. Heller. In that ruling, the Supreme Court seems to see it the way I do (above).

The Court reasoned that the Amendment’s prefatory clause, i.e., “[a] well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,” announced the Amendment’s purpose, but did not limit or expand the scope of the operative clause, i.e., “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Moreover, the prefatory clause’s history comported with the Court’s interpretation, because the prefatory clause stemmed from the Anti-Federalists’ concern that the federal government would disarm the people in order to disable the citizens’ militia, enabling a politicized standing army or a select militia to rule. – “See more at: http://constitution.findlaw.com/amendment2/amendment.html#sthash.R6xXCBo9.dpuf

They also upheld the ruling that the District of Columbia’s total ban on handguns infringed upon the individual’s right to own a gun, any gun, putting restrictions on an entire class of weapon that the American people have overwhelmingly chosen lawful for the purpose of self-defense. It also upheld that complete disassembling of, or rendering inoperable, said weapon would make it impossible for the citizen to use the weapon for self-defense, thus violating the 2nd Amendment.

Notice I bolded a phrase in the last paragraph? Putting restrictions on an entire class of weapon that the American people have overwhelmingly chosen lawful goes against the 2nd Amendment.

For those who think that The Founding Fathers intended the 2nd Amendment pertained to only those “arms” from their day? Well, those weapons are now currently banned. So, if not those weapons, what?

I’ve had people argue with me on this point alone, saying “Why does anyone need an AR-15 or an AK-47.” My response is, and always has been, “I don’t need it. But it’s my right to own it.” (Although I don’t own one, I do want to one day, or at least fire one.) The majority of people have said that these types of guns should be banned, they are too violent. No one needs them for self-defense, or hunting.

No self-respecting gun advocate or responsible/ethical hunter would hunt with this type of weapon.  However, there is a certain amount of self-defense that comes with this type of weapon. That in which we need to arm and protect ourselves from a rogue government. What if our government decided to ban this weapon, yet put it int he hands of their own employees to defend against public unrest? Oh, wait, this is already happening! The IRS is being trained on AR-15s, the same type of weapons they want banned from the hands of US citizens. Don’t believe me? US House Representative Jeff Duncan is the House Homeland Security Committee Chairman and witnessed IRS agents doing just that.

IRS. What the hell?

So how’s that going to work if the government bans AR-15s and the like? The IRS is the government organization in charge of enforcing Obamacare. I’m afraid that their enforcement will be brutal if the training is any indication.

The government knows something’s coming. They know and are preparing. Why aren’t we?

Why are we still fighting over what should and shouldn’t be banned? Would you be so outraged if the IRS came in to your town and started rounding up everyone who didn’t have Obamacare and started shooting? It could happen. In my warped, demented mind, in the minds of history buffs and professors, and in all the minds of any dystopian writer, it’s already happened.

By no means do I want to diminish anything like the horrors of Sandy Hook Elementary School, or any other mass shooting that’s ever happened, or ever will happen. Those who do these things are evil, pure and simple. But people should not base their opinions on gun and gun owners on the acts of the few that are so over-reported on by the media. Doing so is akin to anyone who prejudges by race, creed, skin color, hair color, whether someone’s tattooed, or wears glasses, or what type of job someone has.

Just like any of our laws, we have plenty of them. We need to start enforcing them better, not making more. Banning for the sake of banning is not going to prevent the evil in this world. Where there’s a will, there’s a way. And if it’s not guns, it’ll be something else. Just look at what a small backpack and pressure cooker can do in a crowd at the Boston Marathon. They WILL find a way. And I want to be protected from that evil, whatever form it takes.

What we need is education! I strongly support background checks and wait times for purchasing guns. I also strongly support education of properly handling, shooting, and storing your weapon. Too many people die because of improper handling, improper storage. More of these types of gun deaths go overlooked in the media because it’s not massive, it’s not a money generator. Who’s going to read about some guy cleaning his weapon who forgot to remove the bullet from the chamber before he started cleaning? The media is a business and they are all about the profit. If it doesn’t generate enough of it, the story goes to a blurb on the back page where no one’s going to read it. The media controls our worldview. (But I’m getting off tangent here.)


Here’s another reason I have for owning a gun: A few years back someone broke into a house and raped the woman in front of her three kids. It was in my parents neighborhood. A very nice neighborhood where you wouldn’t expect anything like that to happen. Well it did. I was scared for my mother’s safety until that monster was caught. If the woman had a gun, I highly doubt he would have gotten that far.

Here’s something that just went viral in the last day or two. A woman at home with her two kids. A man breaks into her home and beats her in front of her 3 year old daughter while her 1.5 year old napped upstairs. People are sick! And it can happen ANYWHERE.


So, with all that said, yes, I now am the proud owner of a Walther PK-380. I have also started learning how to shoot. TheHubs was a Range Instructor in the Army and a Sharpshooter to boot. So, I am comfortable learning from him. However, I do want to enroll in proper Handling/Shooting from an NRA certified instructor, as well as Home/Self-defense classes at the local range here.  I would like to get a conceal carry license but I probably wouldn’t carry. My gun is for home defense. But it would give me the legal authority to carry my gun out in the open to and from the range. Although, I do like the security of knowing the gun is not readily accessible when I transport it in its case in the trunk, if we were to go traveling that option would be there. I still am not comfortable with handling my weapon. But with practice, the better I will become.

Here’s me firing for the first time:

This is after I bawled my eyes out when I first touched the gun. The guy in the lane next to me was firing a long rifle and just as I touched my gun, he shot off a round and scared the bejeezus out of me.

Here’s me firing, and my target:

My Target & Grouping

My Target & Grouping
TheHub’s is all in the neck, and the one in the head. I did everything else.

Me Shooting

Me Shooting



  1. Ping from Candace Gauger:

    I don’t think anyone could have said it better. Personally, I don’t like guns and would prefer not to have one near by. Not because I don’t like guns, but because I know I wouldn’t think twice about using it when threatened, or in the rare case, angered to that point.

    Not enough people know themselves well enough to keep or use a gun responsibly and these are the ones who want them the most to harm innocent people for imagined, or even real, insults.

    To me, a gun is a tool to help gather food and protection (in the proper hands, naturally).

  2. Ping from Rebekah Loper:

    Very well said!

    I have every intention of getting a “carry permit” (good for open or conceal carry here) as soon as we can actually afford it and the firearm. We’ll likely be getting a shotgun first, because a permit isn’t required for a shotgun in Oklahoma.

  3. Ping from simontall:

    Firearms related deaths in USA per 100,000 population equals over 10 (2011) this equates to something like 11 or 12,000 deaths every year. I live in the UK where the figure is 0.4 per 100,000 people. In England and Wales in 2012 there were only 41 homicides involving guns. Just 41. It seems obvious and logical to so many of us outside of the US that less guns clearly equals less death, violence and injury.
    Just because the constitution gives you the “right” doesn’t necessarily make it right…
    If you wish to have guns to protect yourself from violent or ‘evil’ citizens then you may well end up killing someone yourself. Are you prepared for that? I certainly wouldn’t be. In my country there are violent and disturbed people, but they are VERY unlikely to possess a gun therefore I am MUCH MORE likely to survive any attack. Shouldn’t we be asking what is wrong in our societies that means such people are so very isolated, disturbed or unhappy that they feel the need to be so violent? That is the issue surely. Do you really feel so unsafe that you need a gun? If so what needs to be fixed so that you do feel safe without a gun? In my country I need not fear when I walk the streets that anyone I encounter may have a concealed weapon. The only time I EVER see guns is when I visit an airport. The police on my streets do not have guns, because they don’t need them.
    If you wish to protect yourself from a rogue government three things come to mind. Firstly western governments and corporations are so powerful that they are already controlling and exploiting us without them needing to use guns. There are plenty of cases of corruption in your country and in mine. And we continue to elect the same kind of people. Recent events suggest that they go so far as to spy on ordinary citizens actions on the Internet and beyond (but that is a whole other debate and who knows what the real story is?).
    Secondly I would suggest that the people are perfectly capable of overthrowing rogue governments without resorting to arms. If they have the belief and the will. Take Ghandi for example, he toppled British rule in India by peaceful protest. Imagine a hundred million Americans refusing to pay tax, or marching on Washington. It is possible if it were necessary.
    Thirdly any armed rebellion against a rogue government would simply start a protracted and bloody civil war. Just look at Syria right now.
    And exactly who is it would decide the Government was rogue in the first place?
    To paraphrase Thomas Paine “A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong gives it a superficial appearance of being right,” – this for me applies to gun ownership in the US.
    In the interest of healthy debate I hope my views do not offend but it seems to me that for many in the US owning a gun is seen as being somekind of badge which shows that you are a ‘good American’. Well you simply don’t need guns in my opinion. At all. I can be a good citizen, defend my rights and home and challenge my government quite easily without an offensive weapon whose only purpose and design is to KILL other human beings…

    • Ping from LadyJai:

      My statistics professor welcomed us all to his class with these words, “Welcome to Statistics. Or, how to lie with numbers.” I’ve never forgotten that, nor the way he described how to do just that. So I’m not going to have a war with numbers here. You can find statistical reports that say “gun ownership up, violent crimes down” just as well as finding reports to the opposite. There’s no sense arguing this point. But I’m left wondering how long the violence against that soldier in London would have gone on had an armed citizen stepped in, rather than waiting 20 minutes for the police to arrive.

      Although I am not 100% prepared for taking a human life (let’s face it, who is that’s still sane?), I’ll be damned if I sit back and do nothing but plead as someone threatens my son’s life. If I know me, I will suffer the consequences after I save my son’s life. I may not recover fully, if ever, but damn it, I’ll be able to enjoy my son for years to come.

      I thought I made it clear in my post that there are definitely things wrong with how one obtains a gun. so, yes, there is something definitely wrong with our society to allow such evil people in this world to gain access to the gun. We shouldn’t ban all guns because of that. No, we should fix the problem. Putting a bandage on a severed limb is not going to stop the bleeding, or heal the wound. Honestly, I don’t know how to fix the problem of making me feel safe. I couldn’t even begin to fathom a guess. There are countless guns that go unregistered, fall through the cracks, and get into the wrong hands. It’s just too easy.

      I agree with you on how much corruption and control the government and corporations have over us. And I also agree that “we” keep electing them over and over. But I disagree with you on the point that people are perfectly capable of going against a rogue government without the use of firearms. Do you think Gandhi would be able to do so now? I highly doubt it. Did you not see the fact that our IRS (Internal Revenue Service) the government organization in charge of collecting our federal income taxes…TAXES…are now learning to fire AR-15s? How the hell are we supposed to go up against our own government when they have the firepower and we, the people, do not!?? Tell me?

      And I never said anything about not starting a bloody civil war. We’ve had one before. And the way things are going…it might just happen again.

      Who decides what a “rogue government” is? Well, that would be “We, the people.”

      I’m not offended by your comments. I welcome open, healthy debate. (it’s those who resort to name-calling and trolling that I don’t welcome). I know you are not American and therefore do not share my worldview. Heck, a lot of Americans do not share my worldview. But the brilliant thing about America is our Constitution and our Rights. And because of my First Amendment, I’m able to express my views. You are definitely able to express yours, even though you may not fall under The Constitution. I still welcome them. As Voltaire once said (or at least it was said he said it in a book about him) “I may not agree with what you are saying, but I will defend, to the death, your right to say it.”

      Any “ism” is good, maybe even perfect, on paper. It’s when you inject the human element into the equation that totally blows that “ism” out of the water. When any entity grows so large that it can no longer police itself, the people need to be wary, as well as prepared. As long as man walks this earth, nothing will be equal, nothing will be fair, and blood will always be shed.

      • Ping from simontall:

        I agree with lots that you say. And I like your constitution, (we don’t have a written constitution we are subject of a monarch chosen by God). And I agree your point about statistics although however you count it we have less risk from guns than you do, you must agree that.
        Perhaps someone may have been able to intervene in that terrible attack in London if we had guns perhaps not. Two things strike me about that, firstly how much worse would that have been with guns (god forbid automatic weapons)? Secondly you have to ask the question why? Why did those young men (who grew up on these shores) feel so alienated that hey would wish to commit such an atrocity? The answer surely lies in the history of government foreign policy (UK and US) that has made both our nations targets for extremism (there is no terrorism in Switzerland for arguments sake). It also lies in domestic policy that promises prosperity which turns out to be only for the few.
        Again I hope I do not offend but I feel you ave missed my point. Yes perhaps the will always be bad people and blood, but without guns the consequences would be much less. One man with a gun can kill or maim tens maybe hundreds before he is stopped. One man with a knife and his fists could kill a few but not as many. And you are much more likely to survive a knife wound than a bullet. I take your point that the determined few (and they are very few) could still make bombs etc but you must agree that if your government removed all guns and gun ownership the OPPORTUNITY to kill and maim would be reduced. This is only logical. I am not saying it would make a perfec world, far from it but it would be a massive step in the right direction.
        And lastly to ‘the people’. We the people outnumber those in power massively. Yes they might have the guns but in a supposed democracy MASSIVE peaceful civil disobedience would easily work. Again imagine what the government would have to do if a hundred million Americans said no, stopped working, paid no tax, and sat in protest in all the major cities. Any government would fall in that situation because the economy would collapse and the major corporations wouldn’t stand for that. Then you could elect someone better. All that is required is the popular will, not guns. The reason that doesn’t happen is because ideas are controlled too. Again by goverments and big corporations (just look at the media!)
        The genius of blogging is that ordinary folk like us can discuss such ideas!
        What does it actually feel like to fire a gun like that? Did you think of the target as a real person?

        • Ping from LadyJai:

          Thank you for replying and being so diplomatic about it. We both have made great points for both sides. I concede your point that the “opportunity” may be diminished. But because I love my Constitution, that I believe in it so much, I want to keep my rights in tact. I grew up a military brat. I had the opportunity to live and experience other cultures, something many people here in the states do not get to do. Most don’t even leave the confines of their little town. Because of this, I feel that I can understand other countries a little better than most. Because I grew up the way I did, I was also exposed to a very different educational system, as well as a different history, than most. I grew up learning and understanding my country in a way that is no longer taught. I have such great pride in my country and my Constitution.

          Unfortunately, the majority of Americans who would “rise up” in peaceful protest would either be shut down by the corporations or government (case in point, The Occupy Movement) They truly do have more power against the masses that they let on. We have to work to find a better more effective way to stand up against those who abuse us. But until that happens, I think I’ll keep my weapon.

          Besides, I think it would be freaking awesome to go into competition shooting! Amazing! I have to get over my fear of the gun, though. I know it’s soul purpose is to kill. And that’s stuck in my head. I love my right to own a gun. But I fought actual ownership for years! I didn’t want it in the house. But after certain incidents and the way things are going down hill in our city (and society) well, I’d rather be armed than a victim. And I have to educate myself. I don’t want to own a gun and never fire it because that’s just down right asking for trouble. And when my son is old enough, he will be taking lessons too. He’s been very good about not touching the medicine in the house. We’ve drilled education about medications in our house in his head. We’ve never hidden anything from him. We always tell him what it does and the consequences if he got a hold of it. We’ve told him how to properly handle it if he finds a stray pill. And and we’re doing the same with the weapon…as well as properly storing it without him having access. It’s the curious ones, the ones who are never taught, that usually have the accidents. And I want to prevent that from ever happening in my house.

          My first clip I fired, I couldn’t see a thing because of the tears. As I said before, the guy next to me fired his long rifle just as I touched my gun. My very, very first experience with a weapon was a shot gun. I swear to God I didn’t fire it but it sure as heck went off in my hands. I hadn’t touched a gun in 20 some years because of that. So, through my tears, my husband stood behind me, held my hands over the gun, aimed downrange, and made me fire the weapon. He told me to take that fear and convert it to anger, think about the man who just broke into our house and is trying to hurt our son. I didn’t like it! I cried. I was afraid. It was like trying to drive a car with your eyes closed and relying on your passenger as your guide. But because I was scared, he had to force me to confront that fear. It was simply the most exhilarating panic inducing thing I have done in a very long time. It was surprisingly easy yet hard all rolled up into one ball of knot! The second clip went a little easier. And in all honesty, the video up there, is probably my 4th or 5th clip. I plan on doing this at least once a month to get more comfortable and then go on to learning the proper methods of handling/shooting and home safety.

  4. Ping from Rebecca Fisk:

    Brava…that’s really all that needs to be said, I think…Brava!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

CommentLuv badge

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: