This is one of those topics that has a large grey area. I find this odd because most people I talk to feel very strongly about it whether they support it or not. There is a lot of debate over the subject. Debate over what exactly the second amendment means, what it meant when it was originally written, whether or not that meaning is still valid in today’s very different time and state of mind.

For some, the argument is whether or not the constitution gives individuals the right to own firearms. I don’t believe it comes down to this at all. I think what you have to look at is the fact that the constitution doesn’t give the government the ability to ban guns from citizens. The Declaration of Independence recognizes the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Without the right to keep and bear arms, we the people would have no defense against a tyrannical government. Additionally, without the right to bear arms, we would not have the ability to protect ourselves, our lives, or our property. The government has been over stepping its bounds from some time, and gun control is just one more way it is doing it. For example ever since Nixon created “The war on drugs” in the 60′s we have had our constitutional rights taken from us. I am not saying that I am not against drugs, I am, but I don’t believe the government is acting within the constitution by banning them.

Advocates of extreme gun control laws often see them as a necessary tool with which to make society safer, particularly from criminals and the mentally ill. That said, there is no direct link between gun laws and reductions in violent crime. Latin America, Russia and Africa have far stricter gun control laws than America does, and this has done nothing to curb violent crime there. Even when a nation adopts extreme anti-gun laws, the rate of violence committed by the mentally ill tends to stay the same. Places with gun control laws far more strict than ours, still have occasional, mentally ill related, shooting sprees. These folks always find a way to acquire a gun, often through illegal means. Gun laws make it harder to purchase guns legally, but they do nothing about illegal purchases of guns. Felons are already banned from purchasing guns, but guess what, they are called criminals for a reason, they don’t follow the law. I have yet to come across reasonable arguments supporting the wholesale abolition of ALL GUNS in this nation. It would just drive the purchase of guns underground, into an already thriving black market. Those who fight against Second Amendment rights cite statistics about gun violence, as if such numbers are evidence enough that our rights should be restricted. But Chicago and Washington DC had some of the most restrictive laws in the nation, and also some of the highest rates of violent crime. Clearly, such restrictions do not correlate with preventing crime. At the end of the day, the only thing that extreme anti-gun laws will impact is the armed ability of the masses to resist oppression and tyranny. Civilians will be turned into criminals with gun control laws, because they will still go out and buy them.

To assume that gun laws will stop gun violence is like assuming that anti-pot laws will stop kids from smoking dope, or that teenage abstinence programs will stop kids from having sex. I also firmly believe that if more people carried firearms on them at all times then there would be a lot less random acts of violence on the streets. Someone contemplating committing a violent act would think twice before following through with it. They would realize that they are very much more likely to get stopped, caught, or injured.

People easily see the value of, and wholeheartedly support, the First Amendment, even when they have nothing to speak out against. Many of those same people don’t apply that same logic to the Second Amendment.

Even if you hate guns, don’t take away my freedom of choice for that reason. You have the right not to like, own or use guns. I choose to own them and use them.