Ben Franklin once said "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for dinner. Liberty is a well-armed lamb, contesting the vote."
There should be absolutely no doubt that the right to bear arms at least in part meant the right of the people to be able to overthrow the government by force. This is not ambiguous.
However we live in a very different time from our forefathers, and the irony of the statement in our self proclaimed war on terror is far from lost on me, even if it does often seem lost on others. The attack on the world trade center was a vote against globalization and western hegemony, in blood. Our forefathers took a more moderate, tea based approach.
In each, an aggressive armed response from the nigh omnipotent foe was launched. In each, the disproportionate and imprecise nature of the response, against all and not the perpetrators, drew more to the fight. The outcome...we'll see.
This isn't to defend terrorism, but more to point out that no one ever believes their cause is unjust, the actions unjustified. Our forefathers, correctly, feared tyranny. And they believed that without an armed nation, there was simply no stopping the consolidation of power into dictatorship.
You have to remember what an experiment Democracy was, largely without precedent since Rome, and even then collapsing into de-facto monarchy. How could one conceive of a government not kept by arm, but rather through social construct.
Consider for a moment Florida in the year 2000. There was no war, simply a decision by the Supreme Court and all of us consenting to the rule of law. Consider now the impotence of our President on new legislation, simply caused by public opinion. This isn't natural human instinct, it is over 200 years of repetition and faith.
So again, let us consider the 2nd Amendment and what it means.
The question is, would our Democratic army, raised in the social construct we have created allow an unpopular leader to become a dictator? In America, can you think of an occupation that draws more from the formerly disenfranchised than the military? Would they follow blindly?
I don't know, but I would like to think not.
What is more likely to happen is a popular leader gains dictatorial powers, and in that case armed insurrection wouldn't work, as if he is popular, who is insurrecting?
Now we aren't dealing with muskets. We are discussing rebel factions getting access to nuclear and biological weapons. We are playing a different game.
This is why many wonder if the 2nd amendment still makes sense, or if it only facilitates to arm extremist minorities, with less extremist minorities taking a more Ghandi, M.L.K type approach to social change.
However what is often overlooked in the discussion of the 2nd amendment is what drives the gun lobby and moderates like myself crazy. It isn't just the right to insurrection that is at issue, but to survival. Guns represent survival if the social contract is breached on levels beyond rebellion. It represents the safeguard of our base needs. Survival, Safety, and sustainance.
We take for granted in our modern world that the trucks will come to supply our stores, that our currency will be taken in exchange for goods and services, that police officers will come to assist us, while judges will moderate our disputes. We are spoiled in this way. And the ownership of a gun functions as a social safety net should these things cease.
That is my perception of the 2nd amendment, and my view of it's role in modern America. It is why I am for relatively easy access to basic hunting rifles, and more challenging access to other firearms as they decrease in utility and grow in lethality. I am for registration, as rebellion and terror are neighbors, but against bans for most firearms that fall short of status as weapons of mass destructions.
Yes, there will be Seung-Hui Cho's out there. And we should do what we can to reduce availability of weapons to those who have shown they cannot handle the responsibility of them. But as we do so with automobiles, there will be car accidents that kill far more than crazed gunman. Life is risk.
Thoughts, Discussion.