Jon Stewart has skewered the Governors’ Sex Scandals as they’ve happened all along, but he’s not one to sit back and just wait for the jokes to write themselves. Even now, when they actually do write themselves. And the result? This:
Oh, how I laugh. I wonder what my mom will say.
This week the Supremes are coming out of a 69-year long hibernation and taking up the issue of Gun Control. Dahlia Lithwick’s coverage over at Slate has been both about the court and about the dubious activities from the Bush administration. I don’t get a good feel for where she stands on the issues, but she tends to be liberal, so I’m guessing she’s for gun control. I happen to be for *some* gun control, but not for eliminating them entirely. Which is a much harder stance than it should be. But that’s not what I want to discuss. I want to discuss the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment, so let’s first quote that mutha:
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.
Now, I’m not going to get into the debate about the commas and capitalizations, you can read up on that yourself. It’s worth it, but only academically, as it serves to incredibly cloud what is, in reality, a very clear issue.
As Ms. Lithwick states, the problem comes from interpretation. Which is a nice way of saying it’s a PEBKAC error. Or an I.D.10t error. Ok, fine, it’s the reader, not the words, and whether the reader comes to the conclusion that the militia is a group right or that having arms is an individual right. And this is where it’s good to point out that this bit of inked flotsam is a fucking amendment, and therefore follows the tenor and impressions of the document that is amended by it. And since that document is the Constitution, which only does two things, we should first look to those things.
The first thing the Constitution does is establishes the rights of people. Why? Because it’s the people who then, as a group, determine the functions of government. The only other task that the Constitution does is restrict the rights of government. Those are the only things that the entire document does. Nothing more, nothing less. Don’t believe me? Read it. And all those places where it outlines the branches of government and all that jazz - that’s where it explicitly tells other branches what they can’t do, and who has what power and how it’s all balanced. That’s more restrictions on government. Rights are for people - period.
Now, is this always followed? Nope, but any amendment that does the reverse and takes away people’s rights while giving more power to the government, like the one about “Thou Shall Not Drink” are reversed.
Which leads me back to the lovely Second Amendment. While I am certainly a child of the last 69 years, having only been alive for about half of that time, I’m not a pawn of the NRA. I have my own brain, I choose to use it every once in a while. Like now.
The Second Amendment gives people a right to bear arms. Nothing more, nothing less. The “well-regulated militia”, the reason given, is just that, a reason. The states’ ability to form and keep militia is outlined earlier in the Constitution itself, along with all the responsibilities of it. But remember the time this was written. It took 20 days for the Continental Congress to recess and reconvene when delegates from South Carolina needed to confer with their leaders. There wasn’t a telephone, and certainly no way to drop lift in a battalion at any of the battlefields. Citizens had to defend themselves, and they needed to keep guns to do so. Which is why this is patently obvious as just a reason for the next bit.
Now, to be clear, I’m not one of the nutjobs that advocates getting rid of the government because they suck, but if the U.S. were attacked and I were forced to protect those I love, I’d rather not do it with kitchen utensils. Sporks aren’t nearly as effective as guns when faced with Hamas. Do I honestly believe this will be needed? Not in my lifetime, I hope, but why not be prepared?
As for those nutjobs? They are why I think some gun control is good. How to do this is harder than it should be, but there’s got to be a way. And we should keep striving for it.
To me, the Second Amendment is clear - the people have the right to bear arms because the people may need to become a militia to defend themselves. In modern terms it would be worded different, but the meaning would be the same. Probably something like
People may need to gather and become a local militia if the infrastructure of the USA and/or their state is compromised or destroyed. Because of that potential need, people have the unrestricted right to bear arms although they are never absolved of the responsibility of ownership of such lethal, powerful items.
It all boils down to people have this right so that government, our own or another, can’t take any rights away through force. “Live free or Die” isn’t a bumper sticker, my friend.
Yep, just when it seemed that we could finally have a news report that wouldn’t include the phrase “latest poll results” we hear that the twits who thought that Ron Paul was a good idea have, now that McCain has the nomination, lost their shit. And no, it’s not funny. These people are off kilter already, and now they are mad, which has turned them into a mob, complete with torches and sack-cloth tunics. But I digress.
Roger Koopman has decided that there are 14 Republican traitors that need to not be re-elected. And here’s the best part, Koopman is already a complete right-wingnut with a special phone direct to Jesus and a rather spiteful hatred of anything that he doesn’t understand. While he may have a triple-digit IQ (I have no idea) after reading what he’s got to say, and what he plans on doing, I’m pretty sure that the first digit is a zero. Why? Oh because
Assisting Koopman in “the liberty project” is David Hart, state coordinator for Republican Ron Paul’s presidential campaign in Montana, who, via e-mail, urged Paul’s “Montana Freedom Fighters” to help recruit candidates.
is why. I don’t know if you caught it, but given that my readership is generally outside of Montana, let me tell you.
Realize that this is Montana, The Last Best Place. Well, the last best place to hide while writing a manifesto and sending out mail-bombs, Teddy. And Teddy was merely one of the more notorious figures nationwide because of where he sent the bombs. Had he just mailed them in Montana, he’d have been relegated to the slag heap of history with the rest of Montana’s nutjobs.
Nutjobs that tend to be hiding in plain sight in my lovely home state. Nutjobs that Ron Paul has riled up and organized. You know what happened the last time nutjobs got organized in this state? They went nuts.
Let me sum up this little gem from 1996 for you:
Allow me to interject, as you might be thinking “Gee, Hamm, that doesn’t seem too bad. What is your problem?” and if I weren’t from Montana, I would be thinking exactly that. But I’m from here. I know these people. Trust me, it’s not going to end well. Just from going over the story I hear their voices in my head as they verbalized their hatred and distrust of “the gubbament”.
Yes folks, Montana. Lovely state. Great skiing. Amazing summers. Fantastic wilderness, resources, and even a lot of good people. I can’t forget the good people, just because I’m pointing out that we grow the World’s Largest Nuts™ – only ours don’t grow on trees, but they do have the ability to vote. These are the people that Ron Paul and his Baffling Brigand of Bigots have decided to rile up. These are the people that they’ve decided to organize and aim at a target.
Are you following along here? Do you get how very dangerous this is? Just in case you don’t, it’s like covering a baby in bacon and tossing it to a pitbull. And like those 81 days in 1996, this, too, won’t end well.
So, I was reading the latest gem over at JMG, which is about this insanity, and figured that I had to point this bit out:
…whines about imaginary victims, rages against imaginary villains and seeks above all else to run the lives of persons competent to run their own lives…
Fundamentalists, be they Christian, Muslim or whatever other religion, are the one’s who have, throughout history, believed in righteousness of their God, who, I would point out, is the Ultimate Imaginary Friend. Religious wars are fought on the basis that one groups UIF is better than the others’.
Fundamentalists, be they Christian, Muslim or whatever other religion, are conservative, yet they constantly whine about their god, their beliefs, their “moral fiber”, and rage against marriage equality, the gay agenda, activist judges, and many other “liberal” causes, and seek to enforce their own way of living on everyone else.
Yes, people who think and act along the lines of the quote are truly insane. I think more of them spend several hours a week preaching about their UIF than spend time fighting for basic human rights.