“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.”
The words are easy to read. The words seem easy enough to understand. As I understand this; the security of a free state is dependent upon the availability of a capable and available fighting force, and in order to have a capable and available fighting force the people are afforded constitutional protection in the keeping and bearing of arms.
I believe there should be a limit on which type of arms a resident can purchase, manufacture, and own. The types of arms available to military should be available to the citizenry.
My perspective on this is personal. My perspective may differ from yours. I don’t presume to be correct in my interpretation of the amendment, and I am committed to abiding all Federal firearms laws as well as the laws of the State, County, and City where I reside. But abiding by the laws, so as not to become a criminal, does not require that I agree with the laws.
When the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was ratified in 1791 the 15 year-old nation had concluded an eight year campaign for sovereignty from 1775 to 1783. That war began with an attempt by the British military to deprive the colonists of their firearms, which were kept in armories in the towns of Concord and Lexington. These are the same firearms that the citizenry used in the war for liberation, the same type of firearms the military they battled against were using. Furthermore, there was a Congressional desire to disband the standing military and keep on-call militias as the fighting forces for the states in times where congress had not declared war. The Second Amendment is designed to permit the citizenry to keep military weapons in their private residences and bear military arms in the event those human and material resources were needed to defend either a state or the nation.
I welcome conversation about the purpose of the second amendment and its limits, though I am not interested in long debates about the legality, lethality, or need for particular types of firearms. I am more concerned with ensuring that those who choose to own firearms are capable of doing so in a manner that allows them to be safe and assures their families, neighbors, and countrymen that they are capable of responsibly and effectively bringing firearms to bear for whatever purpose they intend.
We exist to guide firearms-owners in the safe, lawful, and effective integration of firearms and we offer guidance in communication and de-escalation, because sometimes the potentially lethal force of a firearm is not appropriate. The mission of the Carry Wisely Firearm Academy is to help people make good choices.
15 April, 2018