Common Sense to the Extreme

May 19, 2002

by Brian W. Peterson

The Founding Fathers were extremists. There is no other way around this assessment if gun control advocates are to be believed. The Justice Department’s recent policy change to properly interpret the Second Amendment has caused gun control advocates to attack views that go back to our Founding Fathers.

Most gun control advocates claim that they are not in favor of banning guns, merely for “common sense” gun control. They say that they hold the admirable position of wanting fewer gun-related deaths in our country. They want to make sure that guns do not fall into the wrong hands. So they claim.

Reality seems to clash with these noble claims. In the case of US v. Emerson, before the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in 2000, government attorney William Mateja responded “yes” when Judge Will Garwood asked, “Are you saying the Second Amendment is consistent with a position that you can take guns away from the public? You can prevent ownership of rifles, pistols and shotguns from all the people? Is that the position of the United States?”

The “common sense” argument was out the window; banning guns was no longer a hidden agenda. The Clinton/Reno Justice Department made an unprecedented argument in Emerson while the gun control advocates nodded with approval.

Handgun Control Incorporated changed its name to the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence. That sounds cheery enough. Prevention of gun violence is not their aim, however; prevention of gun ownership is their aim.

When the Bush/Ashcroft Justice Department this month reversed the anti-constitutional view of the previous administration, the gun control advocates nearly choked on their free-range chicken. The Brady Center cried “extremism.” The Violence Policy Center, another benignly named organization, was aghast. The goal of banning guns in America took a step backward.

Gun control advocates argue that the Second Amendment presents a collective right. They quote only the first half of the amendment in order to convince poorly educated Americans that the Founding Fathers simply intended for officially recognized individuals to possess guns.

A careful read of the amendment reveals that “a well regulated militia” is used in a manner synonymous with “the people.” So how are “militia” and “the people” equal in the mind of those who founded these United States as a free country? According to Samuel Adams, Richard Henry Lee, George Mason, John Adams, James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, and others, the people must have the right to bear arms in order to be free.

George Mason made it clear that the militia is the people. The writers of the Constitution made an editorial statement at the beginning of the Second Amendment to underscore the premise that freedom rests in the hands of an armed populace. “The security of a free State” was the stated intention of the Second Amendment.

But all of the above is neither new nor surprising for those who have studied the American founding. Today’s anti-gunners must cry “extremism” in order to stir the emotions of the ignorant. Rather than favoring strong punishment against criminals, these groups push for laws that affect not only criminals, but law abiding citizens as well.

When their gun control laws fail, more of the same failure is proposed in order to make up for the previous failures. They may claim that what they propose is “common sense,” but in fact it is unconstitutional. The more tragedies that take place, the further their agenda is advanced. It is not in the best interest of the gun control advocates to properly punish criminals. When crimes are not being committed, the general population does not see the need for more gun control. The inverse is true.

The Bill of Rights was enacted to ensure the protection of individual rights, with all of the first ten amendments protecting the rights of the people. How can the First Amendment and Amendments Three through Ten refer to the people, but the Second Amendment only applies to a collective right, as the gun control advocates claim?

Given the work of the anti-gun crowd, it is apparent that they are anti-constitutionalists. Their idea of “common sense” is anathema to the American founding. Either the gun control advocates are extremists, or the Founding Fathers were extremists. Sarah Brady or Samuel Adams? Easy choice.

_________________________________________

Brian W. Peterson writes a political column for the Antelope Valley Press (circulation approximately 60,000) in Palmdale, California. He is a graduate of Oral Roberts University, where he majored in TV/Film. Brian’s weekly commentary and newspaper columns can be found at www.LifeAndLiberty.com.

Send the author an E mail at Peterson@ConservativeTruth.org.

For more of Brian's articles, visit his archives.