Friday, February 9, 2018

A 2nd Amendment Thought Experiment: What Would the U.S. be Like Without It?



The following article appeared in the American Thinker on February 8th


Here's a simple thought experiment regarding the 2nd Amendment. What do you think the U.S. would be like if we didn't have it?

Without the 2nd Amendment, firearms would likely be highly restricted and controlled. Various state legislatures might not vote for that, but it would come about through a combination of federal action, judicial decisions, and bureaucratic decrees. Violent crime would probably be higher as an unarmed citizenry is easy prey for criminals. In all likelihood, America would look like other Anglo countries such as Australia and Great Britain with respect to gun ownership. 
AR 15
That's the easy part of the answer. But there's more to it than that. Without the 2nd Amendment, might not the social and cultural landscape of America be different from what it is today?  

To understand why, look at how far within living memory the U.S. has drifted from its founding principles. The country has been pushed further and further to the left by undemocratic means in the form of judicial decrees and bureaucratic edicts, many of which have no basis in written law or the Constitution. Abortion, homosexual marriage, transgender rights, and massive illegal immigration are examples. And think of all the statewide referendums that have been overturned by the courts because the results went against the progressive agenda. So much for “every vote counts.”

Furthermore, we live in what is called an “agency state.” Loosely written laws give government bureaucrats the power to set rules and regulations that have the effect of law. We've seen government departments like the EPA, staffed by environmental radicals, running amok with their regulatory power. Probably no federal government agency is innocent of bureaucratic overreach, some more than others, which is why the country is choking on 'laws,' many of which people neither know of nor can understand.
What does this have to do with the 2nd Amendment and gun ownership? Simple. Most office-bound bureaucrats, left-wing judges, and government elites are not exactly prime examples of virile American manhood. Quite the opposite. When you think of this government class, which is predominately male, a picture of a feminized metrosexual springs to mind, especially the higher up you go in the hierarchy.  

This point is this. In the back of their minds, even if it is buried at a subconscious level, these people fear an armed citizenry. An armed citizenry puts a check on how far and how fast the government class dares to push its progressive agenda by unconstitutional means. True, the 2nd Amendment by itself has not completely stopped the unconstitutional drift to the left, but one has to believe it has prevent what could have been from being what is. 

Without the check of a 2nd Amendment, how bold would those who hold government power would be? Some real possibilities: Perhaps home schooling would be illegal; many aspects of political correctness might be weaponized by bureaucratic 'law'; unapproved speech might be criminalized; racial quotas might be more prevalent; web sites like the American Thinker, Drudge, etc. could be curtailed and talk radio muffled. 

Here's an interesting second question. What would Europe look like if it had a Second Amendment? Would the people in the various countries of the EU have lost their national characteristics and rights to make their own laws to unelected bureaucrats in Brussels? Would the European states have allowed the EU to dictate to them on Third-World immigration? Would European men be hiding under their beds in fear of Muslim immigrants terrorizing their women? Specifically, would Europeans have allowed their rights as citizens be so usurped by the elite that today they are more subjects than citizens? 
Some would say that Europe has been so emasculated that a 2nd Amendment would not make much of a difference. Perhaps, but then again, would the population of Europe have been neutered in the first place if it had an armed citizenry equivalent to what exists in the United States?

The bottom line seems clear. As far as the United States goes, the 2nd Amendment is necessary, but by itself insufficient, to maintain freedom in America. The 1st Amendment is equally vital, as it protects the right of religion and free speech. The rights in both amendments must be aggressively defended and put to use. As to firearms, one does not have to be a hunter or target shooter to support both the 2nd Amendment and groups that defend it like the National Rifle Association, Gun Owners of America, and the Second Amendment Foundation. Nor does one have to be a member of the press to exercise the right of free speech. The rights guaranteed to us under the 1st and 2nd Amendments must be exercised. If not, they will atrophy like muscles that are neglected which is what the left and its running dogs in the Democratic Party sincerely hope for. 





No comments:

Post a Comment