On The Second Amendment

by Gail Hoffmann

The second amendment has an intriguing history.  Various people and judges have given their opinion on what the second amendment precisely means.  Intense and fiery debates have divided citizens and political leaders.  Why is this amendment so dubious?  Some speculate the amendment means that an individual’s right to bear arms is the correct thinking.  Others believe it is only for service in a militia.  Some believe it is a civil right.

As the debates continue, maybe some common sense could be injected.  As long as people have lived in the United States and even before it was the United States, individuals have had guns.  People have hunted with guns, traveled with guns, protected their home with guns, and enjoyed just shooting their guns.  If the Second Amendment only applied to militias, why have we always, as a country, had guns?  Certainly, the gun itself has not picked itself up and shot someone.  No, the gun must be picked up, aimed, and the trigger squeezed by a human being.  Do we outlaw cars, knives, ropes, all drugs, alcohol, hammers, duct tape, pillows, and all devices that have killed people?  Alcohol kills more people than any other drug yet we can purchase it off most store shelves.  Hubert H. Humphrey sums up a great thought also, …”The right of the citizens to bear arms is just one guarantee against arbitrary government and one more safeguard against a tyranny which now appears remote in America, but which historically has proved to be always possible.”