Giving Up the Gun, by Martha Thomases – Brilliant Disguise

January 29, 2011 Martha Thomases 0 Comments

There has been a lot of discussion lately about the original intent of the Founding Fathers when they wrote our constitution.  Among others, the most conservative justices on the Supreme Court, including Scalia and Thomas, think this intent, more than evolving legal opinion over more than two centuries, is the important part.

Usually, these conversations arise when we’re talking about a right to privacy, which is invoked to argue for gay marriage, abortion rights, and other progressive issues.  In the past, some have invoked original intent to oppose civil rights for African-Americans and women’s suffrage.

This week, however, I’d like to discuss original intent as it concerns the Second Amendment.  According to Wikipedia , this is the text (although there is some dispute about the placement of the commas):

“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.”

The Founding Fathers had guns.  Most people did at that time, since most people lived in rural areas. They used them to hunt and to keep predators away from their flocks.  However, when it came time to amend the Constitution, the founders didn’t invoke self-defense or protection as a reason to bear arms.  Instead, they set the discussion in terms of a “well regulated Militia.”

Over the years, the courts have interpreted this differently, but it seems to me that the original intent was to secure a “free State,” or to keep the government in check.  The founders had just fought a Revolutionary War.  They next amended the constitution to prevent the government from being able to quarter soldiers in a person’s private home.

It would seem that the purpose of the Second Amendment is to assure the populace of the means to rebel against the State.  The Founders wanted citizens to be protected from excessive government, whether it be J. Edgar Hoover’s COINTELPRO program or the attacks feared by militia groups in Idaho.

As a pacifist, I don’t like guns.  Hence, I don’t have any.  However, as a realist, I recognize that it is impossible for me to have enough guns to defend myself from a government that has a modern military at its disposal.  For one thing, I only have two hands, and therefore cannot fire more than two guns at a time.  For another, the government has a lot more than guns.  They have tanks, jets, nuclear bombs, and the ability to close the Post Office (so I can’t get paid).

The Founders couldn’t anticipate these technological developments.

In fact, it isn’t always necessary to resist a authoritarian government with bullets.  As a noted non-violent activist once said, “They’ve got the guns, but we’ve got the numbers.”  Just this past week, tens of thousands of demonstrators have demanded a change in their governments, bringing down a despot in Tunisia and threatening others in Egypt and Yemen.

If we’re going to consider original intent, I have to believe that Washington, Jefferson, Adams, Franklin and the gang would recognize these demonstrations as closer to their intent before they claimed this guy.

Media Goddess Martha Thomases thanks everyone for their support, and is getting on with it.