Rex Regnant Sed Non Gubernat

1. An armed man is a citizen. An unarmed man is a subject.

I submit an unarmed man is a target, and that an armed man is a frightened dangerous animal. Have you ever heard gun owners talk about why they own guns? They seem to walk in a world where they’re constantly on the verge of being raped, robbed, beaten and shot at. I’ve never been afraid here one day of my life. Why are people in, say, Kodiak Alaska so fearful? Know what I’d be afraid of up there? All those skittish gun owners.

2. A gun in the hand is better than a cop on the phone.

This is what I’m talking about. There’s this feeling that if you don’t own a gun, you’re never going to be able to ward off the hordes of Mongol invaders, Viking pillagers and Visigoths that are clamoring to breach the walls of your three bedroom, two-and-a-half bath, split-level ranch which is packed to the ceiling with rent-to-own furniture and 40-pound bags of dog food. As powerless, unresponsive agents of the liberal courts, cops aren’t likely to protect you I guess.

3. Glock: The original point and click interface.

The cleverness of this one cracked me up. And then I remembered that at 10-cent a bullet... the 13-shot Glock.... a point-and-click interface is capable of taking 13 lives for under a $1.50.

4. Gun control is not about guns; it's about control.

Yup. Pretty much.

5. If guns are outlawed, can we use swords?

I’d prefer it if you didn’t feel you needed to arm yourself with anything.

6. If guns cause crime, then pencils cause misspelled words.

Actually, I’m pretty sure an uneducated, impoverished, hopeless and morally bankrupt population figures prominently among lead causes to misspelled words, crime and gun ownership. But that’s just me.

7. Free men do not ask permission to bear arms.

This is one of the few of these pieces with which I almost agree. The constitution, by most interpretations, guarantees our right to own a gun. But gun owners, from my perspective, seem to suggest that if you don’t own a gun then you are being irresponsible. I feel that gun ownership is a dangerous mistake. Constitutionally guaranteed or not, it is an enormous responsibility to own a gun. I feel that in order to hold owners accountable to that responsibility, and to protect those of us who believe that an armed public is a dangerous public, then we need, at the very least, the meager-but-inconsistent shield of background checks, concealed weapon bans, and other legislation against irresponsible use of firearms.

8. If you don't know your rights, you don't have any.

Couldn’t agree more. Which is why the writer(s) of this list have no rights.

9. Those who trade liberty for security have neither.

Now, this is an interesting point to make. I think gun owners say that they own guns for liberty and security. I have no statistics to back this up but I’m going to make a wild supposition here. It’s my feeling that gun owners tend to vote overwhelmingly Republican. Just a guess. If that’s true then they have supported a government that has done more to curtail freedom in the name of security than any other regime in the history of the United States of America.

10. The United States Constitution (c) 1791: All Rights reserved.

As originally ratified in 1787, the constitution made valid slavery and obviated a woman’s right to vote. So, I’m not sure all rights are reserved.

11. What part of "... shall not be infringed .." do you not understand?

Turns of phrase such as “shall not be infringed” and “shall make no law” in the Constitution make things seem inviolable. The Supreme Court has correctly ruled, however, that laws can limit the breadth of concepts like “shall not be infringed.” You have freedom of speech, for example, but you can’t lie about people in public without some pretty dire consequences. You can own a gun, but you can’t own a weapon of mass destruction. So, actually, I think I understand “shall not be infringed” better than you do.

12. The Second Amendment is in place in case they ignore the others.

In 1791, the need for the states to form militias (which was the primary point to the Second Ammendment) was an absolute necessity. “Regular” armies were notoriously corrupt agents of kings at that time. Also, frequent attacks were common by gangs and Indians and even by armies from other states. So, that’s why the Second Ammendment was ratified. Here is a fascinating (and balanced) history of the Second Ammendment. The author of the site offers a proposal as a three section addendum to the Second Amendment. They are:

* Section 1. The second article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.
* Section 2. The right of the people to keep arms reasonable for hunting, sport, collecting, and personal defense shall not be infringed.
* Section 3. Restrictions of arms must be found to be reasonable under Section 2 by a two-thirds vote of Congress in two consecutive sessions of Congress before they can be forwarded to the President for approval.

I encourage you to read the history and framing of the debate here. It’s really interesting. It takes a very centrist position.

13. 64,999,987 firearms owners killed no one yesterday.

299,000 registered sex offenders raped no one yesterday. So your point is…?

14. Guns only have two enemies: rust and liberals.

Sand is pretty bad, too.

15. Know guns, know peace and safety. No guns, no peace and safety.

See numbers one and two.

16. You don't shoot to kill; you shoot to stay alive.

I don’t shoot and everyone stays healthy and happy.

17. 911 - government sponsored Dial-a-Prayer.

It’s also government-sponsored access to a group of people dedicated to plugging the holes made in our bodies by gun owners on a daily basis.

18. Assault is a behavior, not a device.

And a deadly weapon is a deadly weapon is a deadly weapon.

19. Criminals love gun control -- it makes their jobs safer.

Criminals love guns more...they make their jobs possible.

20. If guns cause crime, then matches cause arson.

Actually, arsonists cause arson. Gun owners cause bullet wounds.

21. Only a government that is afraid of its citizens tries to control them.

Only a citizenry that is afraid of everything feels compelled to arm itself to the teeth. And the notion of government fearing its citizens in this case is laughable. If you believe that one of the primary roles of government is to protect its citizens, then that includes protecting citizens from themselves. Making murder a crime is a form of control. Would you abolish that too?

22. You only have the rights you are willing to fight for.

So is that it? You own the guns so you can effectively fight for the right to own your guns?

23. Enforce the "gun control laws" we have, don't make more.

We wouldn’t need more than one if we simply outlawed guns. But that’ll never happen. I don’t know enough about the current “gun control laws” to say whether those are good laws, or whether they are enforced or not. The reason I don’t know about these laws is that they differ from state-to-state and from municipality-to-municipality. This makes it impossible to know or enforce with any consistency the current gun control laws. I think we need to Federalize gun control before anyone will understand what the law is. If I’m not mistaken, that’s the point to the “sections” listed on the website referenced in number 12 above.

24. When you remove the people's right to bear arms, you create slaves.

When you supersede Article I, section 2 with Article IV, section 2, you eliminate slavery. Sometimes a nation outgrows an idea.

25. The American Revolution would never have happened with gun control.

The Civil War would have never happened without the cotton gin. Which brings us to…

26. ".. a government of the PEOPLE, by the PEOPLE, for the PEOPLE..."

What is sadly missing from this quote is the entirety of its context from the Gettysburg Address. The full quote reads, “It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us–that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion–that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain — that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom–and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.” Six hundred twenty thousand died fighting over a failed idea: that a race of people was inferior to another, that a race of people was property. The bulk of the dead came from the side that won. To co-opt Lincoln’s words as support for the anti-gun control movement is incongruous, antithetical and insulting.