Under The Gun: The Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution

I strongly believe that knowledge is power. Unfortunately, according to studies, a vast majority of the citizens of the US do not know the Constitution's contents well. It's time to correct that so we can understand why gun control is such a divisive topic. Also my opinion; you have no business taking sides if you are not informed fully on the topic.

To understand or truly contribute to the debate, you must understand one part of the United States Constitution; the Second Amendment, which is part of the Bill of Rights.

"Amendment II: 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."

Pretty clear cut. The problem comes with interpretation. This can be skewed a million ways, beefed up for the times, etc. The end point is that this is in the Bill of Rights and cannot be taken away (without much ado). that means any law that makes it nearly impossible or impinges on basic rights to own a gun is unconstitutional.

The biggest issue is cutting crime, not the use by responsible gun owners. How do you get the guns away from the bad guys while letting the good guys keep them? The simple answer after you cut through the politics is: you can't. Bad guys are unethical. Laws mean nothing to them otherwise they'd be good guys.

No matter what laws are passed, they have to be constitutional. If they don't meet that standard, they get tossed. Herein lies another problem. Example: the standard magazine clip for many guns is 10 rounds. This is what is starting to be banned. If the gun is made for 10 round clips, doesn't that create a hardship on the responsible owner?

I guess my point is, that even though the Amendment itself is simple, politicians (as they love to do) are making this whole thing a convoluted and nasty mess. Some are trying to circumvent the Constitution. Cannot be done legally. And of course they are making it an emotional topic when it should be a purely logical.

I am no expert on anything but yapping away on 99.1 the Whale, but in my humble opinion, if someone wants to do damage to others they will use whatever tool is available. So even if no guns were available, they would grab another weapon. Aurora, Colorado shooter James Holmes is a good example. He booby trapped his apartment with explosives so the building's other residents would be severely hurt or killed in the blast. He didn't rely just on the guns.

As the debate rages on, take the time to read the rest of the Constitution and remove emotion from the issues.

God Bless America!