News Americas, NEW YORK, NY, Tues. Dec. 18, 2012: President Obama delivered an eloquent speech in Newtown, Connecticut, on Sunday night, and said absolutely nothing.
He made a carefully vague statement to “use whatever power this office holds” to stop massacres like the slaughter at the school here. But he said absolutely nothing.
President Obama did not even use the term “gun violence” let alone use the most powerful opportunity in the nation’s history to say we must legitimately restrict the ownership and possession of weapons of mass destruction to those who have an absolute need for such weapons. No such statement from Barack Obama.
Obama did not even say he will issue an executive order banning assault weapons for sale and possession by the general public. All we got from President Obama was this bromide …
….. to “use whatever power this office holds” to stop massacres like the slaughter at the school here.
Added to his failure we have the painful irony as reported in Monday’s NY Times that bucolic, children friendly, family oriented, peaceful Newtown, Connecticut, is in fact a hotbed of gun ownership and use for “recreation” purposes with all kinds of outlandish activities being reported that involve gun owners who pass as “hunters” firing machine guns as target practice.
Back to the 2nd Amendment of the U.S. Constitution ……..
The 2nd Amendment of the U.S. Constitution has very, very precise wording “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 episode let’s do something you cannot legally or rationally do separate the second part of the Amendment from its all important first part to make a point about the absurdity of current interpretation by the Supreme Court and government agencies.
So again here is the second part of the 2nd Amendment all alone …
…. “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Well if the Courts maintain that must be interpreted literally as written the all important clause is “shall not be infringed.” And the key word beyond all others is infringed.
If infringed is to be interpreted in a strict dictionary definition then there is absolutely nothing whatsoever that the government can do under any circumstances to stop or restrict any citizen of any age or disposition from owning or possessing any gun related weapon they choose no matter the quantity or kind, and further government has no right to tell any gun owner where or how they may display or use these weapons and under no circumstances may government require licensing or identification because any of this can be called infringement. But that is not the case at all in that government has been given the right to put very, very small restrictions on gun ownership and possession. Well how is that????
Either not “ infringe” is absolute or it is not. If it is not absolute then government has the right to provide for any regulation that does not make it totally and absolutely illegal or impossible to own a gun that is deemed useful to protect the public good.
The other all important word in just the second part of the 2nd Amendment is “arms.” What exactly constitute arms?? Neither the 2nd Amendment or anywhere in the Constitution is “arms” defined. One definition found on the Internet in a dictionary defines arms as “instruments or weapons of offense or defense.”
So why are only guns and rifles of every kind “protected” by the 2nd Amendment? Why not dynamite, why not nitroglycerine, nerve gas, anthrax spores, all kinds of diabolic weapons that have been used at one time or another and used as “arm?”
WHY aren’t they all legal under the 2nd Amendment???
Here is the point and it is at the core of this matter and exposes the fraudulent “original” interpretation which supposedly the Supreme Court and government has used for 200 years to leave guns and rifles virtually unregulated but not completely so.
A strict word for word legal interpretation of the second part of the 2nd Amendment would allow for NO restriction of any kind on anything that might be a weapon and since we don’t have that ruling by the Courts they in effect have reasonably and logically ruled government can control gun and rifle ownership and possession.
SO when the Supreme Court then rules as it has recently that almost all restrictions on gun ownership and possession are illegal even to the point that it is a Constitutionally protected right for any citizen to carry a loaded assault pistol down the street or even in a church what the Supreme Court is doing is acting outside of the Law with such contradictory decisions.
We need a President and a majority in Congress willing to stand up to the gun lobby and the hypocrisy of the Supreme Court and place sensible restrictions on 1) who can buy and own lethal weapons, 2) the license they must obtain, and 3) the kind and amount of weapons anyone can possess for personal use.
The framers of the Constitution in 1887 did not include any right to bear arms in the original Constitution, and there is no doubt the Congress and the states that not long after wrote and approved the 2nd Amendment had no intention of allowing the mayhem and horror that is taking place in America today. Nor did the 2nd Amendment prevent government from regulating gun ownership and possession as it saw fit to meet the needs of the present.
So President Obama what are you finally going to do???
About The Writer: Arthur Piccolo is a professional writer and commentator and often writes about Latin America for New Americas.
