Gun Control: The Problem

The problem with the gun control debate in this country is that nobody seems to understand the Second Amendment. Every time I listen to or read a debate on the subject, I find absurdity on both sides. Invariably, supporters of the amendment argue that guns are legal so that citizens may protect themselves against home invaders and armed robbers, that the Framers allowed us to keep our weapons to save us the trouble of having to dial 911…Oh, and so we can all hunt to provide our families with those all-American, Sunday dinner favorites venison burgers and hasenpfeffer. Gun control advocates are no better. They ignore the Constitution entirely, recounting the horror show of the last school shooting, blaming guns for insane behavior, making emotional appeals to stop the violence.

Neither side ever mentions the reason for the Second Amendment right to bare arms.

The following is an excerpt from a debate aired on ABC's "The View," October 2006. This is a good example of the pre-school debate referenced above.

Rosie O’Donnell: "I think the horror of imagining six to thirteen-year-old girls handcuffed together and shot execution style, one by one [O’Donnell is referring to the shooting at an Amish school in Pennsylvania] is perhaps enough to awaken the nation that maybe we need some stricter gun control laws."

Elisabeth Hasselbeck: "So you can’t- You can't take way the right to, to bear arms."

O’Donnell: "Well, it’s not really a right. There’s debate as to what that-"

Hasselbeck: "It is a right. It’s in our Constitution. It’s the Second Amendment."

O’Donnell: "Well, let’s talk instead of yell."

Hasselbeck: "I’m not yelling."

O’Donnell: "I know that the Constitution has been interpreted many, many times. In our country the president puts his hand on the Bible and swears to uphold the Constitution. In the United States there is debate over whether or not the right to bear arms includes the lobby organization of the NRA, allowing no rules and no registration and absolutely, sort of, carte blanche, to make guns available to Americans in a way they're not in the rest of the world."

Hasselbeck: "There should be- There should be a middle ground. There should be a middle ground."

Barbara Walters: "Well, there are some gun controls. I mean, without guns-"

O’Donnell: "Well, what about this? The firearm death rate among children in America 0 to 14 is 12 times higher then all 25 other industrialized nations combined. Combined."

Hasselbeck: "What about the fact that firearms- Well, firearms are used 60 times more to defend people then they are to take a life in this country, too. That’s another statistic. This is why we have the debate."

O’Donnell: "I know, but maybe-"

Hasselbeck: "These things confuse us as, as Americans, but, in, in the results of children dying kind of bring it to a front, they bring it right to a boil. And that's why we have this discussion. That should not happen. But you have to remember that people protect themselves. In the times of segregation, when there were bigoted officers out there trying to just rule over and have government tyranny, people had to defend themselves somehow and they did it with guns."

O’Donnell: "If the man had a knife and he walked in there [the Amish schoolhouse] and there were adult women there and the man said I would like the women to leave because I'm going to keep the girls, I guarantee you, if that man did not have a gun, the mothers who were the teachers in that school would never have left those children alone in that room. Never."

Hasselbeck: "What if they had a gun? What if- Hang on, let's just flip it. I’m saying, let’s discuss all sides. What if, What if those women had guns on them and were able to defend themselves?"

O’Donnell: So you’re saying, you think we should arm teachers?"

Hasselbeck: "I'm not saying teachers should be armed. I'm just giving you the flip side of this situation-"

O’Donnell: "But the flip side is you’re saying-"

Hasselbeck: "-that is a lot of times guns are used to protect people, so we can’t be so extreme."

Joy Behar: "I think people want to hunt, that's a right as you’re describing with their rifles. Why do they need an AK--47? Are these deer in the Israeli army? What is the purpose of a machine gun to hunt with? Now that should be outlawed. Do you agree?"

Walters: Most people do not hunt with-"

Hasselbeck: "I would agree with that. And if you're a good hunter, you don't need that type of weapon."

Walters: "They don't hunt with machine guns."

O’Donnell: "But Barbara Walters. In America, it’s shocking that one is able to purchase an AK-47."

Walters: I’m agreeing with you."

Behar: "Why do they have them?"

O’Donnell: "Right. Because it is a $6 billion industry. And they have way too much power in a democracy, if you ask me."

Wow! This is the sort of debate “informed” American voters are exposed to daily—loud mouth, know-nothings tossing bromides and statistics at one another, spitting up arguments about the Constitution without once citing the intent of the Framers. What did the authors of the Constitution think they were doing when they wrote and ratified the Second Amendment?

Believe it or not, Elisabeth Hasselbeck almost stumbled on the answer when she brought up the civil rights movement.