Does the NRA believe in the Constitution?

US Constitution

“In the end there can be only one.”

This tag line, taken from the Highlander movie, or TV series with the same name, is the way the NRA looks at the U.S. Constitution. Out of the hundreds of sentences belonging to the Constitution, they believe in ONLY ONE.

The NRA Press Conference about the Sandy Hook Elementary School Massacre blames society’s ills on people who disagree with them, media conglomerates, corporations, video games, movies, and even stockholders for the failings of our country, as stated below:

“Too many in our national media … their corporate owners … and their stockholders … act as silent enablers, if not complicit co-conspirators. Rather than face their own moral failings, the media demonize lawful gun owners, amplify their cries for more laws and fill the national debate with misinformation and dishonest thinking that only delay meaningful action and all but guarantee that the next atrocity is only a news cycle away.”

In other words the NRA is against freedom of speech. They don’t believe people have the right to call “gun” a bad word and will call on their supporters to attack anyone who dares bring this debate to the front.

When Bob Costas spoke out for gun control, he was eviscerated by those whose reason for living revolves around guns. NRA supporters have even gone so far as to start a petition to deport Piers Morgan back to England, when he spoke out for gun control. To these people the gun is their mistress, country, and god, all rolled into one.

The reason why the NRA is so set on silencing the news media and freedom of speech is obvious. These are the outlets that remind us of the madness surrounding us daily. The NRA wants to end all debate, so we will spend our resources suspecting everyone and everything, except the lack of gun control.

When it comes to the hell on earth that some people live through, the NRA would prefer we remain blissfully unaware. They want us all to believe that if we all just had gun training, we would be able to out smart, out draw, and out shoot, with deadly accuracy, every criminal in town.

The NRA continues their lies saying the media demonizes lawful gun owners. The media, along with most of society, DO NOT demonize lawful gun owners. We do demonize those laws enabling unlawful gun owners the same rights as lawful owners. We have a right to determine who lawful gun owners should be.

Other NRA lies, perpetuating the myth that more guns are the answer, are highlighted in Wayne LaPierre’s crazy statement below.

“You know, five years ago, after the Virginia Tech tragedy, when I said we should put armed security in every school, the media called me crazy. But what if, what if, when Adam Lanza started shooting his way into Sandy Hook Elementary School last Friday, he’d been confronted by qualified, armed security?”

What the NRA refuses to mention, is that the Columbine massacre couldn’t be stopped, even with two qualified armed security officers at the school. Virginia Tech had over a dozen armed guards, and they were helpless to stop the Virginia Tech massacre that occurred there as well. Fort Hood is a military base. It was bristling with guns. Those of us not suffering from dementia know how that shooting turned out. The NRA in its refusal to acknowledge facts, and their continuation to whitewash all incidents of gun violence, illustrates the true colors of this dangerous organization.

Our Constitutional rights

It never ceases to amaze me how so many people state their constitutional rights while never having read them. When it comes to freedom of speech, too many believe in their right to speak, but not the rights of others.

Of course the country does have people who have read the Constitution, but many don’t remember what they read, don’t understand what they read, or simply read between the lines.

If people are not interested in learning then the research involved becomes drudgery that simply demands too much of their time. Many of these same people look at learning as something to be avoided, especially if it leads to finding out things they can’t understand or worse; things they don’t want to believe.

In the end, it is human nature to follow a simpler path when it comes to learning something new. Just ask your family or friends for their opinion. If the answer given is what you want to hear then that’s what you tend to believe.

The NRA, and the more radical offshoot the GOA, are fully aware of the laziness of the general public. It is this awareness that allows them to get away with telling the public what they want us to accept. The sad truth is, when it comes to the 2nd Amendment, they have succeeded too well.

The 2nd Amendment

The 2nd Amendment is only one sentence long, but its meaning has been corrupted by the NRA, and stretched into something unrecognizable. This reinterpretation is now believed by many without question, and it is the slanted version we’ve come to know as the truth. The NRA could care less about the true meaning of the 2nd Amendment, or the rest of the U.S. Constitution for that matter, as described in this article.

The following sentence is the Second Amendment, in its entirety:

 “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.”

This sentence gives people in militias the right to bear arms to secure a Free State. It DOES NOT specifically give ordinary citizens that right. It can be interpreted in a number of ways but it is in no way certain. What is certain is that the 2nd Amendment is completely silent on the subject of the need to register arms, or regulate how they can be bought, sold, or transported. Nowhere in the U.S. Constitution are these problem addressed even though we now know they should have been. Hindsight is not a just a modern problem. Our forefathers suffered with this affliction as readily as we do today.

What I find the most maddening is how respected people among us agonize over what the framers of the Constitution intended, rather than coming up with simple changes that in today’s society makes more sense. Too many people look at our founding fathers as infallible and forget the awful truth. Many of these people owned slaves. Many of these people believed, “The only good Indian is a dead Indian.” Many of these people were born in a time when witch-hunts were still legally sanctioned.

When the Constitution was written, selling guns to the Indians was frowned upon yet that subject was omitted from the Constitution. Today people believe they can sell to anyone because the NRA gives them their blessing to do so. No burdensome act of Congress has been allowed to amend the 2nd Amendment, or make the entire Constitution clearer, by rewriting it in today’s English. The dangers of an ambiguous Constitution become evident, when you need an army of lawyers to interpret it, and when even the most learned of minds can’t agree on its meaning or intent?

One could easily argue that the 2nd amendment was left intentionally vague, as many parts in the Constitution were, so future generations could address them at a later date.

The vagueness of the 2nd Amendment is especially dangerous as it enables psychotics to amass enough guns to supply an army. Individuals and manufacturers are not bothered with responsibilities while society suffers the consequence. Those who choose to deal with arms are allowed to transport their arsenals, sell either in part or in bulk, to whomever they wish because the NRA capitalizes on this confusion and gives people that right.

To those who want no part of dealing with weapons of death; well that’s just your tough luck. You have no say in the matter, even if you belong to the majority. If you are one of the millions who have, or who will die, due to the continuation of this horrid practice, the answer is elementary. You were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time, and there is nothing that can or should be done for you. Furthermore, you are not entitled to the right of, “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” This phrase comes from the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution. It is merely an anachronism so forget it – fool.

If we used the NRA’s literal interpretation then children have the same rights as adults, to use guns any way they see fit. After all, they die as readily as adults do. Don’t they have the right to protect themselves? When the Constitution was written, children were part of militias, and they weren’t joining just to shoot rabbits and squirrels. I wonder why the NRA doesn’t fight for their rights, the same way they fight for the rights of murderers, psychotics, and terrorists.

A well regulated militia

Let’s return to the meaning and duties of a well regulated militia. How many gun toting Americans are members of a so-called, legal militia?” If we aren’t talking about the army, the navy, air force, National Guard, police, and all other government agencies that are there to protect us, then the answer is zero. Does the NRA and GOA claim to be militia organizations, necessary for the security of a Free State? If they do, then their Commander in Chief is the President of the United States, and they would be under his command as stated below:

Article 2: Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution states:

“The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States;…”

The fight against Tyrannical Governments

The craziest followers of the NRA and GOA claim that their arsenals are justified because they must be ready to fight a tyrannical government. The governments they speak of are not foreign based governments such as Mexico, Canada, Russia, or even England. The government they rail about is their own government, duly elected by the majority of civilized people who live in this land.

The truth is we are in no danger of being invaded by a tyrannical government. We are however in great danger from those among us who cheapen our Constitution, lie about its content, or believe that corporate wealth entitles them to be above the law.

We are cursed with people whose narrow interpretation of civil responsibility makes it impossible for them to accept their own government or the society they live in. While many of these wing nuts claim to love this country, they are incapable of loving a country with laws that don’t suit them. They are in fact, at this very moment, readying themselves for a war against their own family, their neighbors, or especially against people who aren’t exactly like them.

If NRA members believe in gun control, let them prove it.

We are told that 69% of NRA members believe in some form of gun control. I find this hard to believe. If members do indeed believe in gun control, they need to speak up NOW. If they believe in gun control, they need to cancel their membership and force the NRA to adhere to their wishes. Failure to do so will prove once again that NRA supporter’s rhetoric is as empty as the masters that rule them. It could also lead to their being just one more statistic, and one more murder victim.

Why would anyone continue to support and strengthen an organization that supports people who are just one step away from becoming terrorists? Why would anyone continue to strengthen an organization whose rhetoric allows psychotics and known criminals to have access to guns? Why do we allow a minor party of 4.3 million, to dictate the rights of 300 million?

As a final note: Do more guns make us safer? Do fewer guns lead to fewer deaths? It depends on who you ask, but a few things are certain. No one argues that the U.S. has more guns than any other nation on the planet. No one argues that today’s guns are more deadly, more accurate, more numerous, and much easier to obtain than our forefathers single loading muskets. With our gun fascination and macho culture, common sense should dictate that we deal with this problem now. Unfortunately common sense seems to be an uncommon trait in our society.

The concepts above are best explained in the immortal words of Pogo,

“We have met the enemy and he is us.”

Posted in Politics, Rebuttal, Responsibility Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
4 comments on “Does the NRA believe in the Constitution?
  1. Catherine says:

    Great article and well written. I have read and re-read the 2nd Amendment numerous times. Nowhere does it say that an individuals right to bear arms shall not be infringed upon. It makes me sick when the NRA and it’s followers say their individual rights are being infringed upon. They misunderstand that individuals do not have UN-infringed rights to bear arms. It says in the second amendment the government can put up restrictions at anytime it sees fit. Why the government does not point this out to everyone is beyond me.

    • Scott Eaton says:

      Hi Catherine,

      Thanks for your support. Unfortunately, this country must experience tragedy before things get done. Sandy Hook was the epitome of this lesson, and hopefully those who died did not die in vain.

      For me, one of the most moving statements to come out of the Sandy Hook Elementary tragedy were the words from one of the grieving mothers who said something close to the following:

      “I always knew my son was destined for greatness, I just never imagined it would be due to his death.”

      The hatred some low lives in this country hold for the victims of Sandy Hook, and those who would infringe upon their rights to unbridled gun ownership, has reached an all time high. Out of desperation they state that this country can and will go to Hell, if they can’t worship the gun. The fact that the people killed daily with guns is the equivalent of a 747 airliner crashing every day, non-stop, over and over, does not register with them. Even our war in Vietnam did not reach this kind of mayhem.

      Bob Davis, a Minnesota radio host is a perfect example. He literally railed against the families of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting victims, telling them to, “Go to hell,” for suggesting this country needs some kind of gun control. His exact words were.

      “Deal with it, and don’t force me to lose my liberty, which is a greater tragedy than your loss. I’m sick and tired of seeing these victims trotted out, given rides on Air Force One, hauled into the Senate well, and everyone is just afraid — they’re terrified of these victims. … I would stand in front of them and tell them – Go to hell.”

      DISGUSTING!

      The moral compass of this once great nation is sickening. However, I do see a silver lining. I believe that the calm before the storm for gun ownership is now over. The storm is now brewing and the NRA, and their gun worshipping Neanderthals, will not like it.

  2. Anonymous says:

    There is a saying that” If you say something that is a lie, falsehood, story, mis-interpretaion, long enough, many times over and over again, people will believe it” It’s true. That is what those that want to believe that the U.S. Constitution declares that each individual person his right to own and bear arms. I don’t know what “constitution” Charleton Heston was looking at, or believes in, his own or his social organizations constitution? As I see the law, the U.S. Constitution did not give him that right.

    If, as some may argue, that the Second Amendment’s “militia” meaning, is that every person has a right to keep and bear arms. The only way to describe one’s right as a private individual, not as a “militia” but as a “person” (“The individual personality of a human being: self.”) “Person” or “persons“” is mentioned in the Constitution 49 times, to describe, clarify and mandate a Constitutional legal standing as to a person/s Constitutional rights, whereas in the Second Amendment, person/s is lacking. Why not have that same legal standard in defining that individual’s right to bear arms as a “person”?

    In the whole of the U.S. Constitution, “militia” is mentioned 3 times, in Article 1, Section 8, and in the 2nd Amendment. In these references there is no mention of person or persons, only one reference to “people“ in the Second Amendment. People, meaning not a person but persons, in describing a “militia”. “People” is mentioned a total 9 times in the Constitution.

    However, in order to see to believe and see for yourself “person” is mentioned 49 times in the Constitution as described here briefly.

    “..No Person shall be a Representative..”
    “..whole Number of free Persons,..”
    “..three fifths of all other Persons…”
    “..No person shall be a Senator…”
    “..And no Person shall be convicted…”
    “..no Person holding any Office…”
    “..Names of the Persons voting for…”
    “…of such Persons as any of the States…”
    “…not exceeding ten dollars for each Person…”
    “…And no Person holding any…”
    “…or Person holding an Office of Trust o…“
    “…and vote by Ballot for two persons,…”
    “…List of all the Persons voted for,…”
    “…The Person having the greatest Number of Votes…”
    “…and if no Person have a Majority,…”
    “…the Person having the greatest Number…”
    “…No person except a natural born Citizen,…”
    “…Any Person be eligible to that ….”
    “…No Person shall be convicted of …”
    “…except during the Life of the Person attainted….”.
    “…A Person charged in any State…”
    “…No Person held to Service…”
    “…The right of the people to be secure in their persons,…”
    “…and the persons or things to be seized….”
    “..No person shall be held to answer…”
    “..nor shall any person be subject for the same offense….”
    “…they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President,…”
    “…the person voted for as Vice-President,…”
    “…all persons voted for as President,….”
    “…all persons voted for as Vice-President…”
    “…The person having the greatest Number of votes for President, …”
    “…and if no person have such majority,…”
    “..the persons having the highest numbers …”
    “… The person having the greatest number of votes…”
    “..and if no person have a majority,…”
    “…But no person constitutionally ineligible…”
    “…All persons born or naturalized …”
    “…nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property,…”
    “…nor deny to any person within …”
    “…number of persons in each State,….”
    “…No person shall be a Senator or …”
    “..and such person shall act accordingly….”
    “…of the death of any of the persons from…”
    “…death of any of the persons from…”
    “…No person shall be elected to the office…”
    “…and no person who has held the office of President,…”
    “..to which some other person was elected…”
    “…shall not apply to any person holding the office…”
    “..prevent any person who may be holding…”

    What am I missing?