(click on ads for more details)

A Moral Obscenity (About Guns)

By Gordon Francis Corbett (8-27-01)

    Some people say that our young people have too much "access to firearms."  Others proclaim that the Second Amendment only assures us the right to have a militia "well-regulated" by Washington.

    Our youngsters' ability to obtain firearms is not a problem.  My father taught me to shoot when I was eight years old.  I competed on a rifle team in one of the two high schools I attended, and on my university's rifle team as well.  None of us shooters committed the least act of violence.

    Why?  Our parents had taught us right from wrong, and made certain that we understood.

    What about the argument concerning the Second Amendment's phrase, "A well-regulated militia?"  "Well-regulated" meant "proficient," or "well-drilled."  "Militia" means "unorganized militia":  everyone from eighteen to forty-five years of age.  Moreover, I doubt that the Founding Fathers wanted Washington to "regulate" our militias so that we could shoot a tyrannical government's soldiers properly.

    Strip the anti-gunners' arguments of their factual errors and phony reasoning, and what remains is a desire to disarm everyone except the government.  If pressed, they say that the Second Amendment is obsolete and should be ignored or repealed.

    Many of these people are pacifists.  They believe that no human being should ever hurt another, and because they know that thousands of Americans are shot to death every year, they want to forbid our owning firearms.

    Baloney.  Everyone has a right not to be injured or killed;  but, an attacking criminal forfeits that right, allowing his morally intact victim to defend himself.  That is why peaceable citizens arm themselves, and why criminals almost never attack victims known to be armed.

    The disarmament of individuals, or of nations, is a moral obscenity.  We should distrust the judgment of anyone who recommends either.