I support the Second Amendment, which is the right to possess arms that, in times of emergency could be used for militia purposes. This Constitutional Amendment acknowledges that unless we’ve suffered the death of our rights through a felony conviction, we have the right to unmolestedly keep arms in our homes and bear them on our persons. In this case, I use “arms” in the way that it was used in the late eighteenth century: individual weapons, which I would define as the M2 or smaller (relatedly, “well-regulated” was used the way “well-functioning” is used today).
Why do I support this? The first reason was already stated better than I could ever say it. Yes, I would probably be described as a “gun nut” by many people. However, this is not the only reason.
Studies have shown that the prevalence of firearm ownership leads to a reduction in violent crime. In fact, one criminologist, Gary Kleck, showed that while attempting to show the opposite. Almost all statements to the contrary have their roots in the Kellerman study. The Kellerman study is absolutely meaningless, and would be even if its methodology wasn’t flawed. It was published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, so the people peer-reviewing it were not experts in this field, they were experts in how to treat injuries and diseases. Along with that, Kellerman has withdrawn his assertions.
Some of the people who prominently own firearms scare me. A few seem to be the type that would do harm to me because I don’t agree with them on very many things. Therefore, I’d like to be able to defend myself with equal or greater firepower.
Firearms are a source of equality in the world. When those at the bottom rung of society carry weapons as lethal as soldiers with several thousand dollars’ worth of equipment, governments no longer can be oppressive. When 120-lb little old ladies are equally able to cause violence as 180-lb gang members, they are also able to defend themselves on equal footing as the gang members.
Lastly, even if studies showed a correlation between legal access to firearms and crime, that still wouldn’t be a good reason to restrict access to firearms. This is for the same reason that banning drug use is not acceptable. As long as a person is involving nobody who doesn’t consent, it’s nobody’s business what is done or possessed. As I do not live in a police state, I should not have to register or demonstrate a need in order to do anything.
“That rifle on the wall of the labourer’s cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there.”