The Second Amendment of our U.S. Constitution says: “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.”
It was ratified Dec. 15, 1791, a time when individual Americans might have to defend their newly won freedom from foreign enemies, hostile Indians, wild animals, or provide food for their tables.
Unfortunately, there have been many abuses of arms — murders, robberies and a wide variety of other crimes. So what about the right of self-defense and of protecting our homes?
There have been many legal arguments about how to retain the constitutional “right to bear arms” and yet avoid the many dangers and crimes that arise from the abuse of gun use.
The justices of the Supreme Court of the United States are scheduled today to take up again what the Second Amendment says, means and allows — and does not allow — in our modern society.
There are countless laws that have been enacted by states and local government in efforts to control the improper uses of arms. For example, laws prohibit the use of arms “in offense” — and even “in defense” — while laws allow our people to be licensed to carry firearms, and to use them in hunting, sports, etc. Yet, an astounding misuse of arms causes about 30,000 deaths (about half of them suicides), plus 70,000 wounds, each year. And countless criminals illegally use arms against us.
There is great concern among many Americans as they watch to see what the Supreme Court justices will decide in the current case.
Any really good and satisfying court decision will be difficult. It would be best for there to be a carefully drafted constitutional amendment to be considered by Congress and the people of the 50 states, rather than just by five or more of the nine justices.
Whatever the court decides will stir more controversy.