A few thoughts on gun control and the 2nd Amendment

Ms. Annie Oakley

I watched a rather chilling interview on Chris Mathews last night. He was "debating the 2nd amendment" with a lawyer from the gun lobby.  The lawyer was lying his head off. Matthews was too stupid to catch him on it.

I call Matthews stupid because he isn't lazy and can't use that as an excuse. I think he is stupid for not ripping into this mouthpiece of a lawyer when he had the chance.  Among a few of the "observations" put forth was:

1.  At the time of the revolution, belonging to a militia was mandatory.
2. Everyone was required to own a gun and did. Gun ownership was 100%.

I think about a guy who is running for the US Congress somewhere in the depths of Texas.  He is  advocating a "Second Amendment Solution" to his view of what is wrong with this country.  This jackass feels that the second amendment - the "right to bear arms" (own a gun) for my foreign readers, was put in place for "defense" against the tyranny of a central government gone crazy (that means King George reincarnated and suddenly our president).  It is that stupid.

Unfortunately this is endemic to the far right's "win at all costs" campaign to "reclaim America". From what we might ask? From commie/socialist/marxists why that's who. if you give these nitwits guns in the street we are all doomed.

For those of you who don't know, the 2nd Amendment went through a number of drafts before the rather twisted amendment was agreed upon.  Somehow the right wing in our country has perverted the evolution of the amending to an individual's right to own guns, buy guys, keep guns, strap guns to their hips and go see the President of the United States.

For your reading pleasure, here are the three drafts to the 2nd Amendment that were written prior to the final. After reading them, let me know if you don't think this entire debate is entirely off track.  

I. The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well armed and well regulated militia being the best security of a free country but no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms shall be compelled to render military service in person
II. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, being the best security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; but no person religiously scrupulous shall be compelled to bear arms.III. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, being the best security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; but no one religiously scrupulous of bearing arms shall be compelled to render military service in person. 

I can't for the life of me tell you how distorted this argument has become.