What would the founders say about the dominance of firearms in our country today? The Preamble to the Constitution includes “provide for the common defence” among its goals. Defending the nation against other nations is what is intended — there and then, particularly a conflict with the British Army.
Following up, the Second Amendment specifies how that is to be implemented in the absence of a standing army to take the field against that large, well-equipped, well-trained warfare machine: “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.” Volunteer militia soldiers, under the command and control of officers authorized by the state, were authorized to bear arms that would match what British (or mercenary) soldiers carried. It was long guns against long guns, primarily — muskets against muskets, in companies arrayed rank against rank.
Facing those British, individuals acting on their own would have caused only chaos, and ultimately a predictable, crushing defeat. And today that is just what is happening on our mean, violent streets. Handguns, easily carried and concealed, are whipped out to be fired by enraged — deranged — fools. The sad cycle of killing begets killing, and the beat goes on. “Breaking News” in the evening knee-jerks with, “If it bleeds, it leads.” And “to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, [and] insure domestic Tranquility,” the high ideals that precede “common defence” in the Preamble, get little if any attention.
What would those founders say to us? In my opinion, they would be incensed and very blunt: “That is not what we had in mind! Stop perverting and subverting our words for your own selfish, self-centered purposes!”
Fred Reklau
Oak Park