I am not a Constitutional Scholar but I do have comprehensive reading abilities. With all the new laws popping up nationwide that regulate our right to bear arms, it occurred to me that a basic reading of the Constitution requires that an amendment be passed in order to make these laws constitutionally valid. Therefore, I embarked on a quest to find this amendment, and alas, none could be found. I’m being facetious of course. As a Constitution-carrying American citizen, I am fully aware of the fact that such an amendment does not exist.
However, there are two amendments that make the gun control laws passed by various states constitutionally invalid.
Amendment X: Reserved Powers
Amendment X states:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, orto the people.
This amendment clearly stipulates that the states have all powers to enact laws, as long as those laws do not conflict with the Constitution. This amendment is commonly referred to as the Supremacy Clause, meaning that the Constitution exerts authority (or supremacy) over state laws – or state laws cannot contradict the Constitution. I call it the Trump Clause, meaning that the Constitution trumps state laws if there is a conflict.
Amendment II: Right to bear arms
Amendment II states:
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.
A collection of guns, including the sort of assault firearm that Bonnie Erbe complains of. Photo: user kosheahan (Flickr), CC BY 2.0 License
This amendment has been debated by ideologues that try to twist and pervert its meaning in order to make the public believe they have the right to “infringe” upon this right secured for us under our Constitution. In so doing, they argue the meaning of a well regulated Militia. However, you will not hear them arguing “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” There is good reason for this. The meaning is simple. People (that includes everyone reading this post) have the right under our Constitution to keep and bear arms. “Keep” means right tohold or maintain something in your possession, and “bear” in this instance means to hold or support and transport something – as in “to carry.”
The amendment also makes it clear that this right “shall not be infringed.” Infringed means encroach on somebody’s rights or property: to take over land, rights, privileges, or activities that belong to somebody else, especially in a minor or gradual way.
When you put all of this together, it means that the states do not have the right to take away or encroach upon in any way shape or form our right to possess or to carry arms of any type. Therefore, for all the state gun control laws to be valid, a constitutional amendment rescinding our (the people’s) right to possess and carry firearms or any other kind of arms needs to be ratified. Until that day comes – God forbid! – those who enact such laws are either incompetent legislators and representatives or constitutional criminals. In either case, they should be impeached or at the very least not re-elected to their current position.
And for all those bleeding hearts out there who have bought the argument that gun control laws would have prevented some of the horrific incidents that have become common place in America, let me ask you if you really believe that these laws will deter the type of characters who committed such atrocities? If you do, surely there is nothing that I can say to logically persuade you that you are wrong. However, I can encourage all constitutionally savvy citizens to insist that our three branches of government uphold the Constitution, regardless of their personal ideologies. If they believe something is dramatically wrong, let them go through the amendment process to rectify that wrong. They cannot – however – pervert the Constitution or usurp its dictates. Those that do, do not belong in the people’s house.