SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Students, families, and supporters of "March For Our Lives" took to the streets of New York City to demand that their lives and safety become a priority and that we end gun violence in our communities and schools today.
(Photo: Erik McGregor/LightRocket via Getty Images)
The Second Amendment Demands Gun Control
A National Guard, yes. Heavily-armed lunatics roaming the streets unregulated? Never.
Jun 23, 2022
This piece was first published in large part at Common Dreams on January 13, 2011; it has been updated in light of the latest horrific Supreme Court ruling.
Make no mistake: this murder and mayhem has been made possible by the claim to a Constitutional right that is not there.
The Second Amendment supports those of us who would CONTROL guns---and thus prevent the insane slaughter that compromises our security.
James Madison and the Founders of this nation would be enraged to see the Second Amendment being used to put guns in the hands of so many random, crazed mass shooters in this country.
Indeed, this week's horrifying Thomas-written ruling undermining most American gun control will have all-too-familiar consequences that would utterly devastate Madison and his ilk.
Here is what the Second Amendment actually says:
"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."
Of the first Ten Amendments, this is the only one that contains a rationale for what it requires.
The Bill of Rights is the law of the land, clearly stated. Guarantees of religion, speech, assembly, the press, freedom from torture and so much more are natural rights, inherent to the human condition.
But "the right to keep and bear arms" is granted only in the context of a well-regulated militia and thus the security of a free state.
A National Guard, yes. Heavily-armed lunatics roaming the streets unregulated? Never.
Lawyers and the courts have been fighting over guns for 220 years, since that great day in 1791 when the Bill of Rights was ratified. The essence of the Founders' intent was embodied in the Supreme Court's 1939 Miller decision, the prevailing judicial view until the recent coming of a hard right NRA-based court very much out of synch with the sane balance our nation has tried to maintain between gun rights and the public good.
As we've just seen in Uvalde and so many other places, these faux "conservatives" have allowed renegade ownership of rapid-firing instruments of wholesale slaughter.
This imbalance clearly threatens "the security of a free state." The Second Amendment says access to these weapons must be strictly regulated.
As a free and lawful people, we have the legal duty to end this unconstitutional madness.
Make no mistake: this murder and mayhem has been made possible by the claim to a Constitutional right that is not there.
The assassins and mass murderers who continue to threaten our national security make ever so clear the reason for the Founders' demand that gun ownership be wisely regulated.
These are dark times for those who demand sane regulation of gun ownership. But courts come and go. Public opinion and political power, like the common law, change and evolve. These murders in Uvalde--just the latest in a long, horrifying, thoroughly avoidable procession of senseless, gun-inflicted tragedies--underscore once again that this is a struggle we can never abandon.
And in continuing to do this work, gun control advocates must not cede a legal inch. We are the the ones with a more accurate "Second Amendment remedy"... the clear Constitutional demand for a "regulated" gun ownership that serves rather than destroys the "security of a free state."
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Harvey Wasserman
Harvey Wasserman is an activist and author. His first book "Harvey Wasserman's History of the United States" was published in 1972. Harvey edits www.nukefree.org.
This piece was first published in large part at Common Dreams on January 13, 2011; it has been updated in light of the latest horrific Supreme Court ruling.
Make no mistake: this murder and mayhem has been made possible by the claim to a Constitutional right that is not there.
The Second Amendment supports those of us who would CONTROL guns---and thus prevent the insane slaughter that compromises our security.
James Madison and the Founders of this nation would be enraged to see the Second Amendment being used to put guns in the hands of so many random, crazed mass shooters in this country.
Indeed, this week's horrifying Thomas-written ruling undermining most American gun control will have all-too-familiar consequences that would utterly devastate Madison and his ilk.
Here is what the Second Amendment actually says:
"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."
Of the first Ten Amendments, this is the only one that contains a rationale for what it requires.
The Bill of Rights is the law of the land, clearly stated. Guarantees of religion, speech, assembly, the press, freedom from torture and so much more are natural rights, inherent to the human condition.
But "the right to keep and bear arms" is granted only in the context of a well-regulated militia and thus the security of a free state.
A National Guard, yes. Heavily-armed lunatics roaming the streets unregulated? Never.
Lawyers and the courts have been fighting over guns for 220 years, since that great day in 1791 when the Bill of Rights was ratified. The essence of the Founders' intent was embodied in the Supreme Court's 1939 Miller decision, the prevailing judicial view until the recent coming of a hard right NRA-based court very much out of synch with the sane balance our nation has tried to maintain between gun rights and the public good.
As we've just seen in Uvalde and so many other places, these faux "conservatives" have allowed renegade ownership of rapid-firing instruments of wholesale slaughter.
This imbalance clearly threatens "the security of a free state." The Second Amendment says access to these weapons must be strictly regulated.
As a free and lawful people, we have the legal duty to end this unconstitutional madness.
Make no mistake: this murder and mayhem has been made possible by the claim to a Constitutional right that is not there.
The assassins and mass murderers who continue to threaten our national security make ever so clear the reason for the Founders' demand that gun ownership be wisely regulated.
These are dark times for those who demand sane regulation of gun ownership. But courts come and go. Public opinion and political power, like the common law, change and evolve. These murders in Uvalde--just the latest in a long, horrifying, thoroughly avoidable procession of senseless, gun-inflicted tragedies--underscore once again that this is a struggle we can never abandon.
And in continuing to do this work, gun control advocates must not cede a legal inch. We are the the ones with a more accurate "Second Amendment remedy"... the clear Constitutional demand for a "regulated" gun ownership that serves rather than destroys the "security of a free state."
Harvey Wasserman
Harvey Wasserman is an activist and author. His first book "Harvey Wasserman's History of the United States" was published in 1972. Harvey edits www.nukefree.org.
This piece was first published in large part at Common Dreams on January 13, 2011; it has been updated in light of the latest horrific Supreme Court ruling.
Make no mistake: this murder and mayhem has been made possible by the claim to a Constitutional right that is not there.
The Second Amendment supports those of us who would CONTROL guns---and thus prevent the insane slaughter that compromises our security.
James Madison and the Founders of this nation would be enraged to see the Second Amendment being used to put guns in the hands of so many random, crazed mass shooters in this country.
Indeed, this week's horrifying Thomas-written ruling undermining most American gun control will have all-too-familiar consequences that would utterly devastate Madison and his ilk.
Here is what the Second Amendment actually says:
"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."
Of the first Ten Amendments, this is the only one that contains a rationale for what it requires.
The Bill of Rights is the law of the land, clearly stated. Guarantees of religion, speech, assembly, the press, freedom from torture and so much more are natural rights, inherent to the human condition.
But "the right to keep and bear arms" is granted only in the context of a well-regulated militia and thus the security of a free state.
A National Guard, yes. Heavily-armed lunatics roaming the streets unregulated? Never.
Lawyers and the courts have been fighting over guns for 220 years, since that great day in 1791 when the Bill of Rights was ratified. The essence of the Founders' intent was embodied in the Supreme Court's 1939 Miller decision, the prevailing judicial view until the recent coming of a hard right NRA-based court very much out of synch with the sane balance our nation has tried to maintain between gun rights and the public good.
As we've just seen in Uvalde and so many other places, these faux "conservatives" have allowed renegade ownership of rapid-firing instruments of wholesale slaughter.
This imbalance clearly threatens "the security of a free state." The Second Amendment says access to these weapons must be strictly regulated.
As a free and lawful people, we have the legal duty to end this unconstitutional madness.
Make no mistake: this murder and mayhem has been made possible by the claim to a Constitutional right that is not there.
The assassins and mass murderers who continue to threaten our national security make ever so clear the reason for the Founders' demand that gun ownership be wisely regulated.
These are dark times for those who demand sane regulation of gun ownership. But courts come and go. Public opinion and political power, like the common law, change and evolve. These murders in Uvalde--just the latest in a long, horrifying, thoroughly avoidable procession of senseless, gun-inflicted tragedies--underscore once again that this is a struggle we can never abandon.
And in continuing to do this work, gun control advocates must not cede a legal inch. We are the the ones with a more accurate "Second Amendment remedy"... the clear Constitutional demand for a "regulated" gun ownership that serves rather than destroys the "security of a free state."
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.