Shall Not Be Infringed

"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." So says the second Amendment to the United States Constitution. The final four words are the most important: "Shall Not Be Infringed".

Infringed is a quite simple word, with a simple definition. From the dictionary itself:

1. To transgress or exceed the limits of; violate: infringe a contract; infringe a patent.2. Obsolete To defeat; invalidate.v.intr.
To encroach on someone or something; engage in trespassing: an increased workload that infringed on his personal life.

Simply put, the government does not have the right to defeat, invalidate, or encroach upon the right to bear arms. According to news reports, and vice president Joe Biden, President Obama is planning on using an executive order to bypass the legal procedure to attack the Constitution.When will enough be enough? How many more rights will we lose to the government? People have lost personal accountability and want the government to provide everything for them, to protect them from everything, to become perfect little drones that listen to the media, watch reality shows, and spit on the bravery and courage that defined the creation of this country.

History has proven time and time again what happens to regulated citizens. Rome, Feudal Japan, Nazi Germany and many other such instances indicate when governments strongly regulate the freedoms of the people, the people revolt. The possible exception would be Nazi Germany, in which Hitler learned from history and used extensive propaganda and strict media control to boost his popularity, giving him unilateral control and the undying loyalty of the majority of its citizens.

Both sides of the gun control argument make extreme arguments for their cause, but in reality it boils down to the fact, its our right as American citizens to bear arms. I do at times find both arguments extreme, fear mongering, and quite frankly ignorant. The favorite one of the extreme gun rights advocates is that they will forciblly enter our homes and take our guns. This will more then likely not happen. To do so would require more manpower then the government could provide, would require those people to willingly violate the Constitution, and would require many more violations of personal rights. The majority of Americans are not so far gone to allow this kind of tactic.

The gun control supporters like to use the question of why would one need an assault rifle? They scream and laugh about how owning assault rifles would not protect us against the government, and that the only reason to have one is to kill large amounts of people quickly. To be honest, yes, having assault weapons would protect against a government gone rogue. Look at Vietnam and Afghanistan. In both cases the US had superior air, land, and sea powers, and neither time were they clear cut victors. If the government told the military to turn on its citizens, a large amount wouldn't. If the government tried to use drones, missiles, etc against American citizens, on American soil, hackers from across the world would do everything possible to tear down the infrastructure, hack the drones, disable grids, and level the playing field. Superior tech and fire power does not equal instant victor. Now, restrict guns and ammo and the field becomes more uneven. For the "kill lots of people argument", did people blame airplanes for 9/11, or the people? Did they blame rental trucks and fertilizer, or did they blame Timothy McVeigh? They blamed the people, not the tool used to commit the crime. A gun is a tool, used for hunting and protecting, for deterring crime and theft, for deterring rape and robbery. A car is a tool for transportation, but in the hands of a drunk driver, it becomes a lethal weapon with no target, no discrimination. If only making drinking and driving illegal would stop this rampage. Doctors are tools to heal and protect us when we are sick and vulnerable, yet an average of 98,000 people die every year to medical mistakes and incompetence. Should Dr's register with some board to determine proficiency? Or perhaps be forced to take training classes to ensure they are knowledgeable?

While this incidence of laws will probably be more restrictions, some may be extreme, this is potentially the first step. Think back to the Patriot Act. Message boards and Facebook were all on fire with the people who understood, then the outrage fizzled. Since then several more addendum's and laws have built on that original act, and we lose more rights. Perhaps this time we get a ban on certain types of guns, more background checks, clip size reduction, and increased ammo prices. We kick and moan, but nothing really comes of it. Next time, two, three or maybe 10 years later it builds on this banning any handgun but revolvers, eliminates high powered rifles unless registered and used only for hunting.

This is how freedoms erode. A nibble here, a bite there. It's not done overnight, it's not done all at once, but when we wake up one morning, we realize we have been duped, conned, and lost the precious freedoms we were given. We believed the propaganda we were given, we believed it was being done for our own good.

If you believe in your right to own guns without infringement, contact your local, state, and federal elected officials by phone and by email, and remind them they are to protect your rights as citizens of the United States, and to take any action they are legally able to, to continue to protect. And also remind them they are elected officials, they can be booted from office next election.

Comments 10 comments

Travel'n Person profile image

Travel'n Person 4 years ago

I have to wait in long lines at the airport to get a flight in the name of safety - so I think we can have stricter controls on who gets guns and how fast.

tngolfplayer profile image

tngolfplayer 4 years ago from Knoxville Author

See, you kinda made my point. The TSA is another large invasion of policy. Why should we submit to being groped, xrayed, missing our flights for special checks? We gave them the power to do this. I used to travel 6 to 8 times a month, after 9/11 I was furious. A lot of people were, now we just cope or deal with it and let it slide. Apathy. We aren't anymore secure, just more inconvenienced, and we let it happen for the false feeling of security. We are never secure, that is life. We currently have waiting periods and background checks for guns. We need to address the problem, not the tool. If you bang your thumb everytime with a hammer, do you ban hammers or fix the problem?

Nothing at all is addressing the problem of crappy parents letting their kids play mature rated games, and watch blood and violence soaked movies. Don't ban the movies or games, but for goodness sakes parents need to step up and parent their kids. Love them, train them, teach them. Be involved in their lives. But quit looking for the government, the schools, the police, video games and society to raise your kids.

OldWitchcraft profile image

OldWitchcraft 4 years ago from The Atmosphere

Good article!

Good response to Travel'n Person.

I no longer travel because of airport security and Customs after being gang-style sexually assaulted by Customs back in the late '90s. (Airport workers have been targeting lone women travellers for years and years.) I won't go near an airport and I haven't been able to travel much since. But, I guess "gang rape" just screams safety and security to some people.

You *can* live without travelling, but some people really cannot live without personal protection. For people who have experienced ongoing threats and stalking, taking self-defense weapons away (or outing their location like they did in NY) is signing their death warrants. (There are a great many women in this position in the U.S. - I'm one of them and I basically live in a constant state of obscurity and hiding, as much as possible.)

I'm frankly shocked at the bloodlust of those on the left and their disregard for the survivors of violent crimes (including the families of the Sandy Hook victims).

Accolades and a vote up! Also, thanks for the follow.

OldWitchcraft profile image

OldWitchcraft 4 years ago from The Atmosphere

Something else - you may or may not find this interesting.

You may already be aware that other countries - particularly Australia - have staged shooting events as a pretext for gun grabbing. And, you've probably noticed some inconsistencies in the Sandy Hook story from the start. Also, if you look at YouTube there's a video of a child witness describing 3 shooters that day.

Along these lines, I ran across this yesterday - it's from Joyce Riley's radio show called The Power Hour. She interviewed a researcher who talks about the irregularities in the official Sandy Hook narrative. This lady is a little on the religious side, but she seems like a nice person and she did a really good show. Here's the links to the two hours. These open with Windows Media Player:

OldWitchcraft profile image

OldWitchcraft 4 years ago from The Atmosphere

In case the above links don't work, here it is at YouTube - the whole hour and about 40 Min.:

Travel'n Person profile image

Travel'n Person 3 years ago

True we need to address the mental health issue - but if someone has mental health problems, they can walk into a gun show and buy a gun without checks or waiting.

I don't want to ban gun ownership - and the government is certainly very inefficient at doing their jobs (current laws are not enforced) - but I don't mind having to wait or submit to more checks before I can buy a gun. Guns make it easy for people who want to do bad things - hammers can only hit one thumb at a time and that thumb has placed itself under the hammer.

tngolfplayer profile image

tngolfplayer 3 years ago from Knoxville Author

What defines a mental health problem? They change it all the time, they have changed autism several times in the past year. Not being contrary, but also curious what mental problems should prevent people from owning or buying guns? Autistic? Aspergers? Bi-polar? Depression? As drug happy as dr's are and pharma companies pretty much half of the population is on some kinda medication one way or the other.

You say you fly a lot, so I guess you have heard about people put on the no-fly list for no reason or notification. What happens when people get on the no-buy list? Both the no-fly list and upcoming I guess no-buy list are too easy to make a mistake.

The only modification I would make is enforcing the background check for felonies.

tngolfplayer profile image

tngolfplayer 3 years ago from Knoxville Author

Yeah, I have followed how other countries have gone about the banning or restriction of guns. The aurora shooting and the sandy hook both have major inconsistencies in them, but at least with the sandy hook one, the police commissioner made a point to state that anybody who questions the official story would be prosecuted.

I knew when the shooting came across my phone as an alert, what was coming. I feel sorry for the families involved. I also feel sorry for people who get persecuted for trying to investigate it. I watched live as they found the rifle in the trunk, then they said it was used, then they said it was revolvers. not sure what the official story is now, it changes almost daily.

tngolfplayer profile image

tngolfplayer 3 years ago from Knoxville Author

Thanks, I have watched.

Connie120 profile image

Connie120 3 years ago

Great hub! Yes, our liberties slowly get eroded every day. I look at the extremes of some of the gun ban bills, and realize that they know all the provisions won't pass, but if they can get a few at a time, they are satisfied. They know that the American people will be willing to give up a little, compared to what they would lose if the whole ban went through.

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.

    Click to Rate This Article