I'm writing to you today to make sure that one thing is clear in my opinion. The 2nd Amendment is one part of the law of this land and all of it's citizens who abide by such laws have a right under this Amendment to keep and
bear arms.
I would like to point you to it:
"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."
In my mind it means a couple of things, the first obvious meaning is to keep and bear arms. More importantly, is all the other parts that people tend to miss of the last part of this essential amendment. The first it talks about keeping a well regulated militia. This means that this amendment is here to let us be able to protect ourselves in times of need. In this day of age it's most important that we be allowed to own the firearms that we've chosen to buy because criminals will indisputably be able to acquire any firearms they wish to buy with the funds gained through many sources. As long as there is a black market to support it. Which means that in order for you to stop criminals from acquiring firearms, they must indeed follow the law. Which criminals do not follow laws by definition. So, by enacting such a law it would only really take away the right of law-abiding citizens to defend themselves with tools that would be adequate to defend themselves. That is the last thing I would think anybody would want to do in such a great country as ours is.
The other part entails that is necessary to the security of a free state and that the right shall not be infringed. I
understand that this right is probably one of the more important ones because it guarantees a free state. It also
implies that the right cannot be tampered with. I feel that enough damage has already been done by the gun
control advocates that we cannot further risk our second amendment rights by enacting laws that do
nothing to actually solve the problems we have with violence.
Yes, you heard me right, the real problem is not the tools used in crime itself, but the criminals. I would support
two kinds of actions if there is to be any solution to the problems we face. I would support a better mental health-
care system, because lets be honest, all crime starts with one intention. It starts with crazed individual(s) that
find the easiest target to attack. Just look at States such as California, New York, and Illinois. They are three of
the highest crime-ridden states in the US and they subsequently have the highest crime rates. I don't think this is
by accident. I believe it's because we have restricted their most important asset, their citizens, from
being able to defend themselves with the tools they need.
You see, the main point of the amendment has those literal meaning built into it, but you also have to see things
from the point of view of the writers of the amendment. At the time back in 1787 when it was being created, we were seceding from a country that was slowly eradicating our rights away. While we were being oppressed by a professional army, we had to have the ability to defend ourselves. At the time the most modern piece of equipment were muskets. Which in today's standard would be something like the AR-15, AKMs (and equivalents), and others like it. “But why have all of this built into our Constitution?”, you might wonder. I can tell you with confidence that it is a check against tyranny. It is a way that we, as the average citizen, can have the same advantage as any standing army of the time in order to defend ourselves. Which I believe is important to the security of our free state. Just remember:
IF YOU VOTE FOR MORE GUN LAWS, I WILL NOT VOTE FOR YOU. WHICH MEANS NO SO-CALLED,
“ASSAULT WEAPONS” BANS, MAGAZINE BANS, UNIVERSAL BACKGROUND CHECKING OR OTHERWISE.
For one, we already have almost 500 pages worth of laws in that regard. Who has the time to sit down and read all these laws? Therefore, any sort of measures that add to an already intensive background checking procedure that criminals would simply avoid is futile. Any sort of additional magazine bans that would make it easier for criminals to attack us with and they would be able to ignore. An outright ban on assault weapons which criminals have been ignoring since the 1930's when the full-auto ban was put in place will be useless. I also urge you never to sign any sort of agreement to take away tools that the citizens of this United States needs in order to curb from striking. So, do not give in to such measures that are really only the easy way out.
Remember what J.F.K. Said:
"Do not pray for easy lives. Pray to be stronger men.”
