A Second Opinion On The Second Amendment

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."
(Facebook photo, Kentucky Congressman Thomas Massie)

I'm not a constitutional scholar, but as a pastor, counselor, grandparent and concerned citizen, I am praying we can all work together to curb gun violence.

I'm sure the founding fathers never imagined the Second Amendment would be used as a justification for the proliferation of gun sales to the extent that the US now has many more guns than it has children. Nor did they envision our being traumatized by far more gun deaths per capita than any comparable nation on earth, with a total of over 270 mass shootings in 2022 alone. We have nearly four times the number of gun deaths (homicides, suicides and accidental) per capita than in nearby Canada, which has stricter gun laws and only around 12 firearms per 100 inhabitants compared to our over 120 per 100 people. 

Yet our two countries have similar rates of mental illnesses, are exposed to the same kinds of rap music, violent video games and other forms of entertainment, and experience similar kinds of family dysfunctions. And we have an even higher percentage of people professing to be pro-life Christians, which should make us less violent, not more so. 

Of course guns do not cause killing, but they do enable killers to be much more efficient in the number of horrific deaths and unimaginable injuries they can inflict in a short period of time. And while the framers would agree that if someone harms another with a lethal weapon, it is the person and not the object that bears the blame, I believe they would still choose to limit access to weapons repeatedly used to cause massive harm.

Besides any assumed need of guns for hunting purposes or for self defense (reasons not explicitly stated in the Constitution) the second amendment does clearly provide for "well regulated militia" organized by the states but under the ultimate authority of the president. Article I, Section 8, states one of the duties of Congress as "To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress..." Article II, Section 2, further states:  "The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States..." 

“Militia” almost certainly means organized groups operating under clearly defined authority, not vigilantes organized and armed for the purpose of overthrowing their government. That's why the founders provided for elections, to bring about orderly changes in national policies and politicians as spelled out in the Constitution. Article 1, section 8 makes it clear that one of the duties of the Congress is"To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions..."  In other words, insurrections are to be suppressed by authorized militia, not initiated by them.

Finally, we have no way of knowing whether the framers of the Constitution would have written the Second Amendment differently had they known the kinds of unimaginably deadly weapons that are freely available today, even to those deemed too young to buy their own beer. As intelligent people concerned for the general welfare of the people, they would surely have engaged in the same kinds of serious gun debates we have today, resulting in our currently having laws that limit the right of civilians to bear arms like grenades, cannons, weaponized drones, Javelins or fully automatic military style weapons. 

Of course no one knows where the founding fathers would have drawn the line, but they clearly intended to create a framework in which differences of opinions and policies could be worked out in a peaceful way. Since the carnage caused by today's unbelievably high powered and rapid firing weapons is so much greater than the musket loaders used in their day, they would surely have encouraged our giving serious attention to what should or should not be permitted.

I'm sure we can all agree that children should never have to fear being massacred at school or, as survivors, have to carry scars of physical and emotional trauma for the rest of their lives. May God help us end the all too familiar kinds of domestic terrorism that are causing irreparable harm to our children and to all of us.