Over the past year there have been several issues in front of the public and taking over the agenda of the country at the expense of more critical issues. The issue that has come front a center is that of “Gun Control” or “Gun Confiscation”. While the Second Amendment may be a matter and need may be due for debate and amendment as the founding fathers would at sometime come, What is going on today is not the course that we should be taking.
The question at this point in time is, is the debate being driven by emotion or is it being driven by a reasonable need for change based on the purpose of the Second Amendment being an enumerated Constitutional Right.
In order to advance the debate and the method for change should change be required there are terms that must first be defined. the first of these terms are of course be emotion. Emotion is defined as for our purposes as “ a conscious mental reaction (as anger or fear) subjectively experienced as strong feeling usually directed toward a specific object and typically accompanied by physiological and behavioral changes in the body” From the definition and in the context of the current debate on “gun control” one can clearly see that the debate is being driven by a subjective anger toward specific events in recent history and a desire to do something, anything to respond to those events.
The second term that must be defined is that of Reason. For the purpose of this discussion Reason is defined as :”Think, understand, and form judgments by a process of logic”. Based upon this definition of reason one can see if they look at things in a logical manner on can see that current proposals are not being driven by thinking, understanding, or forming judgements by a logical process. The debate is being driven by a desire on the part of a few legislators to eliminate or render the Second Amendment null and void.
While proponents claim that the reforms they are advocating are “Common Sense” when one compares the definition of “Common Sense” “Good sense and sound judgment in practical matters” against what is being attempted one fines that good sense and sound judgment are completely and totally absent from the discussion. Nothing that is being put forward as a solution would have prevented resent events except for the total absents of fire arms within the United States. Simple facts are not a single criminal was involved in the resent events driving the current legislative effort. Not a single future event will be prevented from the current legislation. The only thing that will be accomplished is to make criminals out of a greater and greater number of American citizens. But then criminals are who the background checks are aimed at. As Senator Murphy (D Ct) put it today the current legislation is nothing but a platform for things to come. One should take theses words at face value and read it for what it is, Senator Murphy does not want you to have guns and will use the base legislation to increase the number of crimes and other mental health disqualification that are used to eliminate the Rights of Americans under the Second Amendment. (note when Senator Murphy’s office was contacted for explanation about his remarks on the Senate floor this blogger was rebuffed).
Those who have read My posts in the past know that I am not some right wing nut but by the same token I am not some left wing nut. My only agenda is to support protect and defend the Constitution and I believe that the document is current today as it was the day it was written. There are those who lack a fundamental misunderstanding of the Constitution and its promise to this country. The major problem is that most of those who have no basic knowledge of the Constitution sit in places of power. i.e. the US Senate, US House Of Representatives, US Supreme Court, and State legislatures. If you do not like the Constitution the document provides a method for change and that is the method that should be followed.
Today Congress and the states seek to change the Constitution through legduslation rather than Amendment or Constitutional Convention as those methods may not achive the desired results. These leguslators rely on the Judicial Doctrine of “Constitutional Avoidance” this Doctrine allows laws that clearly violate the Constituion to remain the law for years or even decades until the courts have no other alternitive but to address the constitutial issues at which times the laws for the most part fall.
The bottom line of this post is that Reason must once again be the touch stone of our legislative process and not the Emotion of the minute driving the current agenda. The cost is just to high and will eventually result in another civil war, It is time to walk the walk and not just talk the talk.