Information
Opinion
Chris Trotter has done it again – *sigh* – just when I thought he was making a whole lot of sense he drops a clanger of an article that makes me shake my head. In his latest contribution on The BFD he states:
“… It certainly was not a guarantee of the individual citizen’s right to own and use firearms” [a reference to the 2nd amendment to the US Constitution].
thebfd.co.nz/2022/05/30/shots-heard-round-the-world/
And that’s about as far as I bothered reading.
In 2008 the US Supreme Court delivered what is known as the “Heller” decision which, amongst other things, defined the Second Amendment to the US Constitution. Curiously it took well over two centuries to do so. Ever since 2008 various smart-alec types have demonstrated their ignorance by being unaware of the Heller decision, or of what the actual ‘law of the land’ is in America regarding guns.
Heller is far too extensive and detailed for a 600-word article, but some ‘edited highlights’ which are most relevant include:
1. That owning a gun is an individual right, not a collective one.
2. But, ‘abuse it, you lose it’.
3. The “right” is not legislative, but a natural right (i.e. by being physically present in America you possess that right).
A good analogy for gun rights is possessing a library card. Everyone has the presumption they can wander into their local library and be issued with a library card even though there is no actual law which says so. It would seem odd to the man in the street if someone were to suggest he was somehow ineligible to get a library card. But if you steal books, deface books, have a punchup in the library, or break other quite reasonable rules of your local library, then you risk losing the card.
Let me also explain for the benefit of Mr Trotter what the ‘law of the land’ in America is regarding guns and gun rights, as defined by the Heller decision.
The Court ruled (I am paraphrasing a bit) that everybody has the right to purchase a “long gun” (a rifle or shotgun) along with the ammo, and have that at their residence – their house, apartment, (trailer?) – to protect their life and property (actually the Court specifically said you don’t need a reason, you shouldn’t have to justify yourself).
That is the law of the land in America and Mr Trotter’s claim I quoted earlier is simply wrong. Many tens of millions of American households take advantage of that right – although as both sides of the gun debate blatantly lie, it’s difficult to know exactly how many.
In response to the Heller decision in 2008 numerous American jurisdictions loosened their gun ‘laws’ – and many (which have the lowest crime rates) basically abolished them altogether – now that the Second Amendment had been defined. The only holdout was, predictably, New York City where the communist governance makes it difficult for you to protect yourself (the crime stats in NYC tell the story); even that obstruction is probably about to be invalidated by the Court.
Always remember, dear reader, Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, Castro, Lenin, Mao, Ardern, Clark, Lange, Kirk, Nash, Key – (i.e. the people who pass laws abusing your rights and confiscating your stuff) – are anti-guns; but not people like Reagan, Bush, DeSantis, or Trump. Want me to draw you a picture?
When people taking part in the gun debate lie by omission it’s important to explain what the true situation is.
