Gun Laws, the Second Amendment, and Murder in the Streets

The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution states: 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 amendment speaks differently to people depending on their view of gun laws. Does the amendment in fact state that everyone has the right to bear arms? Alternatively, does it mean only a militia has the right? Are both correct, but the amendment outdated?

Would gun related crime levels decrease with stricter gun laws? Would banning regular citizens from owning guns prevent or increase crime rates?

These are some of the questions put to the Viewpoints panel members. Let's see what they have to say.

I realize this is a controversial topic, but I think it's one that deserves to be explored. I want to thank all of you for sharing your opinions with us. Now for the questions.

What do you believe the Second Amendment means?

Tom: It means I have the right to own firearms both for hunting and for self-protection.

theBarefoot: That we the people are in charge of the government and we can hold the government accountable.

Andi: It means that if Canada, Mexico, or any other foreign country tries to invade us, then all males over the age of 14 would be drafted into regional militias to defend us against the attack. It had NOTHING to do with hunting or criminals. Weapons for hunting and self-defense were implied, as there weren't supermarkets with packaged, cold meat.

Cindy: Okay, might sound a bit like Andi on this one. Might be that bachelor's degree in political science. I believe the Second Amendment was intended for the purposes of the common defense. As such, I believe that anyone who serves in the military, the National Guard, or the reserves (being the modern equivalent of a well-regulated militia), should have access to the appropriate firearms to defend the country from all invaders and all enemies foreign and domestic.

Michy: I think what you stated above says it all.

Kess: First of all, that sentence makes my editing nerves twitch. No wonder it is so hotly contested when it is so terribly unclear.

Gun sales went up when Barack Obama was elected president because people believe stricter gun laws will be forthcoming. Do you agree with this assessment?

Tom: It will take a lot more than Obama to repeal a constitutional law.

theBarefoot: The President doesn't make law. The Congress does. There are probably enough anti-gun House members now to get something started, but the economy is going to keep them busy for a while.

Andi: I can't imagine what those people are thinking but boy's ages 14-17 are doing the most murders with guns. Something is wrong there.

Cindy: I think the increase in gun sales was paranoia that people like to blame on Obama's election, but the president is no threat to gun control laws or the right to bear arms. The bigger concern that people ought to have is the way the Supreme Court will interpret the Second Amendment. In that regard, there may be some concern farther in the future depending on the nature of the justices Obama appoints.

Michy: I have no clue. I don't pay as much attention to politics as I should.

Kess: Honestly, I don't know enough about the politics of Obama or his party to know whether or not that's likely to be true. I think that people are easily scared and any excuse will do, and tensions are high in this economic climate anyway. I really doubt that that's the only reason.

Do you think there should be stricter gun laws? Please explain your reasoning.

Tom: What criminals that you know follow a law? Any law?

theBarefoot: Nope. If the citizenry is not as well armed as the military and the government goes rouge and uses the military against us, we should be as well armed as the average soldier. How else could we be a militia? When the 2nd Amendment was written, the average gun was a military-grade weapon. I want an AA12 and all the various shells that go with it. Is that so wrong?

Andi: Absolutely, anyone on steroids should not be let near a gun! Also, meth dealers, crazy people, teenagers not hunting and my husband!

Cindy: Almost no gun crimes are committed with guns that are legally owned. Stricter gun control laws will do nothing to protect the populace from those who would commit violent acts. When Thor was studying in Australia, one of the things that shocked him was the brutality of crime there, including people being beaten to death. While much of the world scorns the United States for its gun violence, a lot of them suffer from brutality in other forms.

Michy: No, I don't. I think there should be stricter and swifter punishment for people who commit crimes with guns.

Kess: Yes. And hell yes. (See answer to 6 for specifics)

The problem is not with the registered/licensed guns - it's with the illegal ones in the streets, in the hands of criminals, gangs and children. However, these guns came from somewhere. How many were stolen from someone's home or business? How many used to be legitimate?

If you reduce the number of guns held legitimately, you reduce the number on the streets. If you make certain types of gun illegal, then they won't be in the stores at all to be stolen or sold out the back to the wrong people.

In your opinion, do you think banning regular citizens from owning guns would lower crime rates?

Tom: It would raise them and in a hurry. If a criminal has no worry about his ability to dodge bullets, he damn sure will not worry about breaking down the door.

theBarefoot: Probably not. The death penalty doesn't stop murder. Criminals commit crimes for less than rational reasons. The thought of a gun in the hands of their victim is the furthest thing from their minds. What citizens owning guns would do is alleviate the clogged court system. If you kill the burglar, there won't be a trial.

Andi: Can't be done. See the 2nd amendment. We have a right to bear arms.

Cindy: With the current proliferation of guns in our society, banning the average citizen from owning guns would result in an increase in violent crimes and a decrease in personal safety.

Michy: It has already been proven, statistically, that this will not happen, and in fact, in areas with stricter gun laws, crime is usually statistically significantly higher.

Kess: Probably not. I doubt it will make them go up, either. If someone wants to do violence or a crime, they will find a way - one of the biggest problems in the UK at the moment is knife crime. Removing the opportunity from a robber to use your own gun against you is a good thing, in my opinion. There are lots of things in a house that you can pick up and use to defend yourself with, if it comes to that.

What state do you live in? Do you think the part of the country you live in has anything to do with your views on gun laws?

Tom: I am in Florida now; the crime rate is high here. No matter where I live, I would like to have the knowledge that a criminal mind has not got an advantage.

theBarefoot: I have lived in 5 different states, none of which have influenced my opinion of the 2nd Amendment.

Andi: Yes. Also, my religion forbids hunting. Animals have to be killed according to Kosher laws. We have many deer on our property and I've never been even tempted to shoot one. I also don't kill spiders although I relish killing mosquitoes.

Cindy: I currently live in Illinois, though I have also lived in Colorado and Michigan. When I lived in Colorado, absolutely everyone I knew hunted. Many of my family members hunt, and those who live in Michigan also have weapons for personal defense. Currently, there are no guns in my house, because I do not know how to use them. Once I have been taught to use a weapon proficiently, I believe owning a gun makes sense for personal safety.

Michy: I live in Texas, where the motto ought to be, "Shoot first, ask questions later," and I grew up with a father who owned guns and surrounded by people who own guns. It's very possible it has influenced my opinion. However, I do not now and never have and likely never will own a gun myself.

Kess: I have lived in New Zealand, the UK and (currently) Australia. Do I count?

Angel: Of course you do, Kess. Love getting an international perspective!

Do you think regular citizens should have the right to own whatever guns they wish?

Tom: I don't think a bazooka will ever be useful in a deer hunt...But there are already laws in place to keep me from owning one. The same goes for a machine gun.

theBarefoot: Yes. The average citizen should have the right to have a nuclear missile silo in their backyard if they wish. Of course, there would be required training and safety protocols to which they must adhere. If you can't afford it, don't buy it.

Andi: My neighbor is a cokehead. I don't think I'd like him to be able to buy an Uzi or rocket mortar. Then again, I'm not sure he's safe with the firecrackers he sets off every 4th of July.

Cindy: No, I don't. Even for personal safety, there is no legitimate reason for the average citizen to own an assault rifle or an automatic weapon of any sort. Automatic weapons were designed only with mass slaughter in mind. I cannot see any situation where the average citizen needs to be capable of mass slaughter.

Michy: No. Where to draw the line, though, I really don't know. I mean, I don't think folks should have nuclear warheads in their backyards, but if someone wants to put up a sawed-off shotgun on their rack, I guess I have no issue with that.

Kess: Hell no.

Handguns - these are made to kill people. They are good for nothing else (yes, you can use them to hunt, but that's not what they're made for). There is no good reason to have one unless you plan to kill someone. As for home security, it is a well-known fact that most guns fired in this situation are used against the owner/home defender, not by them.

Rifles/animal hunting guns - for farmers and hunters, yes. They have a legitimate reason for requiring them in order to live.

Anything else - military only.

For people who like to shoot guns, then registered and heavily controlled gun clubs are the way to go. No gun goes outside the club, they're secured, and they are used in a safe environment.

If you could change the Second Amendment, what would you have it say?

Tom:That it is non-contestable in any form or fashion.

theBarefoot: It's been good for 200+ years and the spirit of it will be good for another 2000.

Andi: We need to defend our families, our country, and ourselves.

We can hunt with guns.

Killing people or robbing them with a gun is not allowed.

Cindy: I think randomly changing the Constitution is a very bad idea. While there is some need to determine the original intent of the document, I think the willy-nilly changes that have been instituted since the Warren Court pose a danger to the continued existence of the Republic. Except in cases of blatant discrimination, I think we need to leave the Constitution alone.

Michy: I wouldn't change it, not one bit. I think when it's interpreted properly, it is worded perfectly. I also don't think the reality of citizens being able to create a militia, a true militia, even exists anymore. Mostly, I'm all for the government governing the country, not the private citizens of the country.

Darn, and here I said I wasn't political.

Kess: I'd make it way less ambiguous. However, I do believe that I am the wrong person to rewrite it. That's up to those who will have to live by and with it.

Again, I'd like to thank the Viewpoints panel members for taking the time to do this interview with me.

Is there one Viewpoints panel member you wholeheartedly agree with? Did their opinions, and reasons, change your mind about gun laws or what the Second Amendment really means?

Personally, I believe the Second Amendment grants me the right to own guns for personal protection. I will do whatever it takes to protect my family and myself to the best of my ability. Banning guns, or taking the ability to purchase them, away from everyday citizens will not help the crime rate. Criminals aren't going through regular channels to buy guns anyway, so new laws will have no affect on them.

Whatever your opinion on the matter, I hope you enjoyed this Viewpoints article.