The issue of gun control

Ever since the horrific mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, CT last month, I have been working to get people behind sensible gun control laws that will renew the ban on all assault weapons and high capacity magazines. Unfortunately, it seems that it will be nigh unto impossible in this country to get any kind of gun control laws passed. I am shocked at how many normally reliable liberals are absolutists where the Second Amendment is concerned. They feel that if it was written the way that the Founders intended, that it means that they have unalienable rights to own as many guns as they want, and whatever type of gun they want as well. But my assertion is this, that the Second Amendment was written thusly: "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." How I interpret it is as follows: the United States had no "well regulated militia" until the early 20th century. Yes, the United States Marine Corps was founded in 1775, and the Army in 1784, but even by the time of the Civil War, there wasn't enough of an army to put down the rebellion, and so President Lincoln called up regiments from the states to create the Union Army. However, in 1903 the National Guard was formed, and per US Code of Law, Title X, §311, the National Guard is considered a "militia":

(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.

(b) The classes of the militia are—

(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and

(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

Therefore, I would argue that the United States lacked a "well regulated militia" until 1903. Now, I am not advocating banning all guns, but it seems to me that the Founders realized that, lacking in any means of self defense as a new nation, that it was necessary for citizens to be armed against the possible incursion of a foreign enemy, since we had just fought a Revolution against our former Colonial masters and it was uncertain as to whether or not they would try to recapture their rebellious colonies. Recently there was an article that went viral around the Internet that asserted that the real reason behind the writing of the Second Amendment had to do with the slave powers trying to maintain their state militias to prevent slave uprisings. Admittedly, I was a tad dubious when I read this, but it does bear more research before rendering judgement on it. Needless to say, times have changed and the Founders could hardly have anticipated the semi-automatic assault rifles and high capacity clips that so many people seem to covet these days. However, no less than President Ronald Reagan, who so many of us joke is "St. Ronnie" to the conservative movement, said, with regard to gun control, “I do not believe in taking away the right of the citizen for sporting, for hunting and so forth, or for home defense. But I do believe that an AK-47, a machine gun, is not a sporting weapon or needed for defense of a home.” (February 6, 1989) This is a man who himself was shot by an assailant, so he became a victim of gun violence himself. 

I just don't think that it's realistic to expect any kind of gun control laws to pass. States already have their own individual laws, but it's a patchwork of varying laws, state to state, and some are more strict and others less so. However, if the Federal Government steps in and renews the ban on assault weapons that was in place from 1994 to 2004, when it was sadly allowed to sunset, and perhaps strengthens that act, then we will have moved somewhat in the right direction for starters. I know that many cops and hunters would side with reasonable gun control laws. No cop wants to find him or herself outgunned and facing someone with armor piercing weaponry. No hunter wants some yahoo out in the woods trying to hunt deer with an AK-47 and firing high capacity clips all over the place. Most hunters will tell you that if you can't bring down a deer in one or two shots, you have no place as a hunter. These are very pro-gun people but also folks who understand the need for sensible gun control laws. But as long as you have hard bitten absolutists on the Second Amendment who will decry any limitations on that law, it is going to be extremely tough to put into place any federal gun control laws. Some folks see it as the first step toward tyranny. You have those squinty eyed types who decry the "dad gummed gummint" and are suspicious of anything that smacks of government intruding into their lives, never mind that it may mean the government repairing that potholed road that leads up to their house (which they are always the very first to complain about and want fixed NOW, mind you!). These are the same types who would sit on their porch and wrap themselves in the American flag while holding a rifle. And yet, don't ask them to pay any taxes to support the government that supports them in ways that they cannot fathom. These folks are also certain that the President is out to come door to door to everyone's homes to collect their guns. What utter nonsense. Nobody is advocating getting rid of all of the guns, just the ones that have but one use, and that is on the battlefield to kill as many people and as rapidly as possible, and even then, nobody's going to come and get your guns. If you own that kind of weaponry, you can keep it. It just won't be able to be bought and sold anymore should a federal ban be re-established. 

But that is a major uphill climb. We can only hope that cooler heads prevail and that meaningful gun control is passed. Time will tell.