Modern Day Gun Control in America: The Bill of Rights and the Right to Bear Arms

Jane Hoppen
In the advent of too many school massacres to now count, including the recent mass shooting at Virginia Tech, we should at least be questioning our gun laws. Annually, more than 4,000 shoes from the feet of children killed by violence are delivered to the White House steps. Courts deliberate whether or not to charge child killers as adults. Now, more than ever, we should be compelled as a society to conquer our dinosaurs. Why would we contemplate life sentences and death penalties for children, but not gun control? We are mired in past ways that no longer coincide with our modern times. If we don't confront the dinosaurs still roaming our lands, the laws of our land, we will deliver extinction to ourselves.

Let's look at the Bill of Rights in the context of the time in which it was written, and then, let's examine it in the context of our present times. Let's compare the weapons used then to the weapons used now. Let's explain weapon access now, and weapon access then. Let's examine whether a Bill of Rights written and established in the late 1700s is still pertinent to these modern times, more than 200 years later. The first ten amendments to the United States Constitution, which is what we refer to as the Bill of Rights, were ratified on December 15, 1791. Amendment II covers the right to bear arms:

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.

We must first acknowledge the first phrase, which refers to Militia. Again, I ask you to contemplate the time during which this was written - a time not long after the American Revolutionary War. This was a time when men donned wigs, banyans, and cravats, while women wore petticoats and cloaks. Education was minimal and primarily took place at home or in one- or two-room schoolhouses, with studies focused on Latin, math, and a few other core subjects. Many children also began to learn their father's trade when they reached school age. People lived primarily in farming and fishing communities and the main crops included tobacco, corn, wheat, rice, barley, oats, as well as apples from orchards. Many of the men also hunted for deer, rabbits, and turkeys. The primary occupations of the time included trades such as apothecary, blacksmith, brick maker, wheelright, wigmaker, harness maker, silversmith, founder, milliner, and shoemaker. Obviously, those were very different times from these times, and I'm sure that, in light of the recent fight for freedom, arms were thought of by the majority only in regards to protecting the country and hunting for food.

Needless to say, the weapons of those times compare in no way to those of our present times. Today we hear about ouzis, AK-47s, TEC-9s, and Lorcin .25s - all weapons that can kill large numbers of people in simple seconds, with one swift sweep of the arm. During the time at which the right to bear arms was established, the weapon of use was a musket. Muskets were very slow to load, highly inaccurate, and frequently unreliable. A well-trained soldier could prime, load, and fire a musket three times in one minute, and the process of firing just one shot was a 12-step one. Muskets did not fire bullets; they fired round lead balls, some of which were the size of a quarter. At short ranges these lead balls could inflict horrible damage on soldiers, as they smashed against a person's body; however, one could not hit a target more than 50 meters away, directly in front. During the time when a musket was a soldier's only weapon, he did not aim his weapon, but instead pointed it in a general direction and hoped for the best.

We know without a doubt that the weapons available to the common street person today make the muskets of that time look like the pea shooters that they were. We must also keep in mind that it was for those very pea shooters for which the Right to Bear Arms was established. Today we have too many arms in too many hands, we live in the country with one of the highest murder rates in the world, and we have an NRA that constantly preaches that gun ownership somehow creates security. In a country that has almost a pop culture of violence and crime, perhaps we should begin to question the laws that enable the general public to be as well armed as our police and military forces. If we revisit these antiquated laws, maybe we can create new laws, laws that address new times, and laws that can assist this country in beginning the progression towards becoming less volatile and violent.

Published by Jane Hoppen

I am a professional technical and creative writer with fiction, non-fiction, and poetry published in various literary magazines and periodicals. My focus is on social issues and change, as well as human meta...  View profile

  • The Bill of Rights
  • The Right to Bear Arms
  • Modern Violence and the Lack of Gun Control
The first ten amendments to the United States Constitution, which is what we refer to as the Bill of Rights, were ratified on December 15, 1791. Amendment II covers the right to bear arms.

11 Comments

Post a Comment
  • Tim11/17/2011

    If you make gun ownership illegal. The only ones owning them outside law enforcement will be the criminals, gangs, etc. Gun control keeps guns out of honest citizens hands NOT the criminal faction. Would you prefer your neighbor sit and watch your daughter getting raped by a gang or would you prefer he stop them with a weapon?

  • ha1/18/2011

    haha

  • bubbaspapaw1/16/2011

    Edwin: Fine job saved me a lot of typing and I know I could not have said it better. Ms Hoppen quotes the Constitution and yet trys to justify breaking it. Her concern about firearms killing and yet the killing of millions of unborn don't bring any complaints from her. I bet her opinion would change if she was a victim or had to live in a high crime area.

  • bubbaspapaw1/16/2011

    Very well put Edwin.

  • Gunluvr1/15/2011

    No, the 2nd Amendment clearly states what it's content means; this has been affirmed by the Supreme Court. The Constitution is not a "living, breathing" document. The right to keep and bear arms extends to all arms; not limited to muskets but extended to UZIs, AK-47s and AR-15s. The big trick is to control the criminal element with certainty and finality.

  • Big Frank9/25/2010

    Whether you like it or not, the statistics speak for themselves. Crime rates go down in areas where few restrictions are placed on gun ownership.

    FBI Report: Gun Ownership Is Up, Violent Crime Is Down
    http://www.personalliberty.com/news/fbi-report-gun-ownership-is-up-violent-crime-is-down-800068807/

  • Robert O. Adair9/15/2010

    Many of the school shootings you pretend to be concerned about could have been mitigated or stopped in their tracks if some body had been able to pull a couple of guns out to stop the shooters. Some of students who perpetrated these crimes were clearly motivated by the forced teaching of the racist, savage evolution myth. Since you are so concerned about children, how do you feel about the evolution sanctioned murder of the unborn? Ramos is absolutely right! You should study the Constitution before mindlessly tampering with it! In Britain where they abolished guns, the crime rate went through the roof. You need to try to focus on the real world or restrict your writing to fantasy fiction like The Wizard of Oz.

  • Robert O. Adair9/15/2010

    Many of the school shootings you pretend to be concerned about could have been mitigated or stopped in their tracks if some body had been able to pull a couple of guns out to stop the shooters. Some of students who perpetrated these crimes were clearly motivated by the forced teaching of the racist, savage evolution myth. Since you are so concerned about children, how do you feel about the evolution sanctioned murder of the unborn? Ramos is absolutely right! You should study the Constitution before mindlessly tampering with it! In Britain where they abolished guns, the crime rate went through the roof. You need to try to focus on the real world or restrict your writing to fantasy fiction like The Wizard of Oz.

  • EDWIN RAMOS9/22/2007

    Yes today our guns are much mored deadly than that at the time of the writing of the bill of rights, but more so are the guns our police, military, criminals and organized gangs have. if we compare their firepower with ours who has the advantage as far as weaponry goes ?
    Who does the balace of power favor ?
    I would love to live and existance where none of this would even matter, an existance without violence,school killings, tyranny etc. but that is not a choice we presently have on this earth.
    "Power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely" -Lord Acton
    The founding fathers knew what they were doing, we need to go back to those principles.

  • EDWIN RAMOS9/22/2007

    Guns establish and maintain freedom. So the intention was to maintain a favorable balance of power in favor of the people against the possiblity of an oppressive government, the founding fathers intended to make sure that the tyranny they fought out of would not happen again.
    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.
    "A well regulated militia" meant the people self-organized for defense. There was no such thing as the national guard at that time, and the national guard is organized by the state not the people. Question: What does the second amendment say is necessary to the security of a free state ? Answer: A well regulated militia. Security from tyranny, invasion, crime anything that would be a threat.
    Third is partially answered by the second. Yes today our guns are much mored deadly than that at the time of the writing of the bill of rights, but m

Displaying Comments
Next »

To comment, please sign in to your Yahoo! account, or sign up for a new account.