I am now being followed on Twitter by "Bear Arms (Pro 2A)," which puts me in good company, as he is also following many of the leaders of the pro gun safety movement. Rather than display the Constitution or the Supreme Court's decision in
Heller as his header photo, this pro 2nd Amendment activist has a big brown bear and a lot of bullets. His bio says: "Voicing reason in America's mostly nonsensical and sadly unrealistic gun control discussion. Land of the free." The suggestion being that I and others who are pro gun safety are not only against the 2nd Amendment, but we are against freedom. Both could not be further from the truth. Like most Americans, including most gun owners, I am pro 2nd Amendment. I cherish the Constitution. I value the freedoms afforded me by this great Nation.
And, I also believe that the Declaration of Independence's granting of the unalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness applies to the 1st graders at that elementary school down the road from me.
I live in Sandy Hook and led Team 26 on the Sandy Hook Ride on Washington, D.C. which culminated at the Capitol approximately 6 weeks ago after a 4-day, 400-mile rolling rally to press Congress to enact stronger gun laws to reduce gun violence. I also serve on the Board of the Newtown Action Alliance, an all-volunteer grassroots organization that is working hard for a safer America. In these roles, I have been on the receiving end of many accusations, such as I am only trying to take away guns, and I have no respect for the 2nd Amendment. Fortunately, these very vocal Americans are in the minority, as the majority of gun owners agree with me and support common sense measures, such as universal background checks.
Nonetheless, if we are to have a serious discussion among all Americans in the coming months as the Senate again takes up gun reform laws, let me be clear that I am not looking to take away any guns except the military style weapons that were covered by Senator Feinstein’s Assault Weapon’s bill. This bill does not impact hunting and shooting sports. However, an AR-15 with a 30 round magazine is a not an arm necessary to kill a deer, but rather is a military style weapon meant to kill many people quickly. It has been the weapon of choice for mass shootings. It does not belong on our streets, in our schools, or at our movie theaters.
This vocal minority views the 2nd Amendment as entitling them to possess any gun, magazine or ammunition they choose without any regulation whatsoever. This position abuses the 2nd Amendment. Under their logic, the 2nd Amendment would give Americans the right to own a missile launcher.
What is more incredible is that this vocal minority ignores the Supreme Court’s most conservative Justice’s majority opinion in District of Columbia v. Heller (2008). In that opinion, the Court declared the D.C.’s ban on handguns unconstitutional. In doing so, the Court interpreted the 2nd Amendment to allow one to possess a firearm without being in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. However, Justice Scalia in Heller made clear that the Second Amendment, like the First Amendment, is subject to restriction:
There seems to us no doubt, on the basis of both text and history, that the Second Amendment conferred an individual right to keep and bear arms. Of course the right was not unlimited, just as the First Amendment’s right of free speech was not …. Thus, we do not read the Second Amendment to protect the right of citizens to carry arms for any sort of confrontation, just as we do not read the First Amendment to protect the right of citizens to speak for any purpose.
You can neither yell fire in a crowded theater nor carry a bazooka into one.
According to Justice Scalia’s opinion, the right
secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited… the right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose…. nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.
This list is not presumed to be “exhaustive.” The law is settled that the right to bear arms under the 2nd Amendment is subject to regulation. And, while, the only open question is where the U.S. Supreme Court will draw the line, it appears that the common sense measures being discussed would pass judicial review. In fact, under
Heller, assault weapons and high capacity magazines may not even be “arms” within the scope of the 2nd Amendment.
Nonetheless, the vocal minority continues to cry “2nd Amendment” and flat out refuses to acknowledge what the Supreme Court said in Heller when they lob accusations against me and others that we disrespect the Bill of Rights as we push for common sense measures to reduce gun violence, such as the murders that took place in my town on 12/14, and the gun violence that occurs every day in big cities. The Heller decision provides the framework for a serious discussion.
Fortunately, the majority of gun owners do not buy into the rhetoric and acknowledge that certain limitations on purchasing and possessing “arms” are constitutional. This recognition should provide the basis for an intelligent conversation among Americans to achieve the common goal of protecting our children.
Follow me on twitter at: montefrank1
www.facebook.com/sandyhookrideonwashington
www.newtownaction.org