ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel
  • »
  • Politics and Social Issues»
  • United States Politics

Another attack on our 2nd Amendment Rights

Updated on July 24, 2015

The right to own a gun in this country has taken a step backwards. Granted there may some need to make some changes with regards to the present process of evaluating what individuals should have the right to own a gun and those who should not. In the past the subject of mental illness has been part of the discussion and coverage when violent crimes involving guns have taken place. Our Constitution under the 2nd amendment gives every individual the right to own a gun if they so choose. The problem is not the process but the individual who commit crimes of any level. Changing the rules involving the ownership of guns impacts law abiding citizens but is does not impact criminals. Criminals will always have a way to get their hands on guns even if they have to steal them.

Changing the rules in the manner in which it is being considered is misguided to say the least. The current proposal being considered involves individuals who receive Social Security checks but do not manage the funds they receive. The idea is that if individuals do not have the capacity to manage their money they do not have the capacity to own a gun. From reports in the news President O’Bama issued a memo to basically threaten individuals who are receiving Social Security benefits with losing it if they do not surrender their guns. This income is something they have earned and the government has no legal right to take it away if individuals choose not to surrender any guns they own. At this point it only involves individuals who have others manage their money. The key point to make is that not having the ability to manage their finances does not mean they are incapable of managing the ownership of a gun or guns in some cases.

The experience with government decisions such as this is only the first step in changing the rules without going through Congress. Sidestepping Congress by issuing a memo to an executive department is well within the authority of the President but only if it is guidance. Executive orders or memos cannot violate laws in place but this latest decision is not the first and more than likely will not be the last. Government has of starting slow and gradually increasing control over aspects of our lives which are part of the rights granted in the Constitution. In other cases control involves making decisions which should be ours to make not government. The decision to own a gun or not is ours as individuals and threatening to take away funds which we as individuals have either earned or need to survive is affecting our very existence.

Government has become too large and is too power hungry and the effort to take away guns from law abiding citizens is not only wrong but violates the Constitution. Granted there are criminals who should not have guns but this action will not stop them from getting them it will only hurt those who want to protect themselves and their families. Too many laws and too many executive orders have been initiated which are aimed at running our everyday lives and it must stop. This latest action is not being taken lightly as there are organizations ready to fight this latest assault on this right under the 2nd amendment. It is hoped that if our judicial system gets involved that the right decision will be made to protect the rights we have under the Constitution.

I applaud any organization that stands up for the rights we have in the Constitution. I only wish the political parties did the same.


    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No comments yet.