Right to Bear Arms Poll – Results & Commentary

The wording in the poll was very specific…and for a reason. As you should know by now I am a “civil-society libertarian” in my political beliefs. As for the Constitution I am an “originalist”, meaning I believe in an understanding of the Constitution based on what the Constitution actually says.

To help clarify, it means I do not believe in, accept, or embrace an interpretation of the Constitution with grand pronouncements or faddish social theories. That concept is what is referred to as a “living Constitution.”  And that my friends the road that the US federal government took…and it has led us to the utter mess we have today…an authoritarian central government.

When the Supreme Court engages in living constitutionalism, Justices can pretty much ignore the Constitution’s words entirely. And doing so can make the Constitution say and mean whatever they wish. In other words, using living constitutionalism they can rewrite laws in their own political agenda image…their own personal beliefs. And that is leading us straight to hell an authoritarian form of government that we are seeing in the US today.

Back to the poll…

The question was simple and straight forward, “Do you support the right to bear arms?” No ambiguity, no confusion, no word play, no vague wording at all…just a straight forward question in every sense. Yes?

I would think that folks who use my website love and support the Constitution. They  believe in it, honor it, cherish it, and would defend it. But the poll shows otherwise. How?

Here were the available answers:

  • Yes, as written in the Bill of Rights.
  • Yes, but felons should not have that right.
  • Yes, but not for military style weapons.
  • No, unless they have training, or are current/retired law enforcement, or current/retired military.
  • No, not at all.
  • Yes, but not for felons and not within allowance of Red Flag laws.

The results were as follows:

  • 86% responded “Yes, as written in the Bill of Rights.”
  • 13% responded “Yes, but felons should not have that right.”
  • 1% responded “Yes, but not for military style weapons.”

Now, why did I word the question and the possible responses as I did? I wanted to see just how many folks are truly supportive of the Constitution as our Founding Fathers intended it to be treated and followed.

Let’s review the wording of the 2nd Amendment of the Bill of Rights…

Notice the clear wording, “…shall not be infringed.” There is no question to the wording; the wording is both clear and concise. Its clarity ad meaning is unmistakable…”shall not” is something that you are responsible for not doing, period. Yes? Do you agree?

Let’s address the 1% that responded and said that people should not have the right to own military style guns. Oh boy, what I want to say I shouldn’t say. So let me suggest you read “The Real Second Amendment!” < click here to read > and then reconsider your position on the 2nd Amendment.

Now for the 13%…

So the wording of the 2nd Amendment doesn’t say anything such as “the right to bear arms shall not be infringed, oh, except for felons, they can’t own a gun.” Yes? No?

So 13% of those who responded and excluded felons from the right to bear arms actually do not support the 2nd Amendment of the Bill of Rights. Now, I am willing to bet you that those same people would declare that they are supporters of and love the Constitution. But is that true…do they really support the Constitution?

If they are so willing to change the entire meaning of the wording in one of the most key amendments that guarantees a right…then what else will they not support?

In all fairness, I would imagine that those who answered within the 13% are good and decent people for the most part. They probably want to make sure that the public is protected by criminals who had committed serious crimes and are perceived as a danger. I would guess that they were thinking something along the lines of “common sense” or “safety” or something similar.

When it comes to convicted criminals there is a concept of “paid their debt to society.” The common, and legal, understanding of that phrase means…once a person has served their sentence for a crime they should not receive additional punishment for that crime. Essentially, their account is marked “Paid in Full”.

The question now is, does preventing a felon who has served their sentence from owning a gun qualify as “additional punishment”? To answer that it becomes rather simple…Does the loss of a Constitutional right qualify as a “punishment”? Well, to me it is clear…Yes! And that is why the Founding Fathers wrote the 2nd Amendment the exact way they did, “…shall not be infringed.

So what about the folks who don’t want felons, who have served their time, paid their debt to society, to own a gun? I would think it their personal preference, their personal opinion, their personal view/want/desire…and that is where the living Constitution concept shows the flaw fundamentally. But, worse than that…it shows how quickly the US can change from a Constitutional Republic into an authoritarian state…a person’s personal opinion has no standing when it comes to the Constitution. The Constitution is clear, the wording precise, the purpose of each article and paragraph specific in nature.

For those of you that feel that felons should not own guns…you are wrong…very wrong. Why? Because the Constitution doesn’t have a felon exemption for that right to bear arms. The 2nd Amendment doesn’t exclude felons from the right to bear arms. That right is for ALL Americans…period!

My point…you either support the Constitution or not…there is no in between. When a person, group of people, or political party begins to change the meaning and intent of the Constitution then you risk losing the very fundamentals that made this country free to begin with. But the most dangerous aspect…all rights in the Constitution now becomes susceptible to whims of agendas…and those agendas being evil as we see Progressives today…or worse…the authoritarians of tomorrow.

 


Related Articles –

 

 

 

 2009 - 2022 Copyright © AHTrimble.com ~ All rights reserved
No reproduction or other use of this content 
without expressed written permission from AHTrimble.com
See Content Use Policy for more information.

2 thoughts on “Right to Bear Arms Poll – Results & Commentary

  1. “In all fairness, I would imagine that those who answered within the 13% are good and decent people for the most part. They probably want to make sure that the public is protected by criminals who had committed serious crimes and are perceived as a danger. I would guess that they were thinking something along the lines of “common sense” or “safety” or something similar.”

    In reality, laws prohibiting felons from owning guns has failed. Once a law is made prohibiting something, anything really, it opens the door for a black market.There are those who profit quite nicely from prohibition laws. That’s been the case throughout history.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s