LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Take the Second Amendment simply for what it says

It is amazing that people simply will not take things as they really are. They insist on making words to mean what they want them to mean. The 2nd Amendment is a classic example of that.

The amendment reads, “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.” Does it say the right of a person, or individual? No, but “the people”. Singular words such as “person” or “citizens” are used throughout the Constitution in reference to individuals but here it is “the people”.

The word “people” is defined as a group or persons or individuals who act together as a group for some action or achievement. It refers to the population of the free state organized together as a “well-regulated militia” or to organize a particular organization as a militia made up of selective recruits. Such an organization historically developed into our modern National Guard.

The word “people” as used in the Preamble of the Constitution, “We the people of the United States”and as used 10 times throughout the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, can only be understood as a collective noun in reference to a whole population of a state or nation.

Therefore, the 2nd Amendment has nothing to do with the individual rights of owning a gun. It gives the right of “the people” of every state of the United States to organize a “well-regulated militia” that in the event of disasters can be used for protection and keeping the law and order. The individual rights for gun ownership is not based on any legislative regulation of legislative law but on a law that is mentioned in the Declaration of Independence.

This law is found in the first paragraph of the declaration and is called the “Laws of Nature” established by nature’s god. Within those laws there are certain unalienable rights that all men are endowed by their creator. All those rights are not given except for three, but among them are “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”

Back yonder, in colonial days it was just a common, natural thing. To own a gun was never given a second thought. It was so for at least two basic reasons. One to provide food and two to protect against wild animal and human predators. As America developed, there came less need for providing food and protection from wild animals. Hunting became more of a sport than a necessity for food.

Unfortunately this was not true of protection from human predators even to this time. A gun can be an equalizer against certain odds in numbers and especially in age and being a female. So the basic defense for guns is by “natural law.”

Legalistic jargon on paper will never eliminate entirely the owning of guns. There are those who will, by legal or illegal means always have a gun. A gun may well be the only defense many of us will ever have to preserve our life per se, and our liberty by which we can freely enjoy our life without being physically damaged in some way or to have a spouse or child taken from a family. Such happenings will certainly impede our “pursuit of happiness.”

So all this hullabaloo by both pro and con parties are missing the entire basis of argument. But if individual gun ownership is ever banned, it will just be another affront to God in which he will have to consider on Judgment Day. There will be one regardless what many may think. And may God have mercy on the defenseless and on those who are responsible, we’ll have to wait and see. Only a change of a godly heart would make a difference.

So the rights for individuals to own guns is not really a constitutional right, but a natural right as endowed by nature’s creator, which is or should be a higher law than any legislative law of state or nation or the ruling of any court system. For goodness sake just take the 2nd Amendment for what it says and means.

The only possible way to totally eliminate guns or use them in proper ways is through a changed heart of every individual through their submission to God through the redemption of his son, Jesus Christ. What a wonderful world this would be if everyone loved God and his neighbor. However, the way the secular world has misplaced the divine creator that is hardly going to happen in this age, but will be possible in an age to come. Curious?

The Rev. Jack M. Beck

Facebook Comment