The end of the 2nd Amendment?

Townhall.com ^ | August 17, 2006 | Cam Edwards

[neverdem]

Ngoc Le heard his wife’s screams and ran from the back of the wireless store he owns in Camden, New Jersey. His wife was behind the counter, as was a masked man wielding a knife. The man brandished the blade, herding the couple into a back room. Once there, he tied the 28-year old businessman to a chair, then proceeded to rape 22-year old Kelly Le. Once the brutal rape had finished, he slit the couple’s throats, then ran away. There was no 2nd Amendment, no right to own a gun, and Antonio Diaz Reyes got away with murder.

That isn’t actually how the events of December 31st, 2004 played out. We do have a 2nd Amendment in this country, after all. So when Antonio Reyes held Kelly Le at knifepoint, Ngoc Le was able to shoot and kill the attacker with his legally owned firearm. DNA tests later determined that Reyes was responsible for a string of rapes in downtown Camden that had terrorized the city for months. The Le’s were shaken by what happened, but there were no regrets.

I was reminded of this armed citizen story when I read Tom Derby’s recent piece in the Philadelphia Inquirer. Derby, an English and reading teacher in Camden, New Jersey, says it’s time for the 2nd Amendment to go away. In fact, he says, “The premise of the Second Amendment, the need for minutemen, no longer exists. In a free society we must rely on the police. We have more important rights to fight for than the right to bear arms.”

Mr. Derby is an English teacher, so perhaps he can be forgiven for not knowing that the U.S. government has said our individual security and safety is not guaranteed by the law enforcement in this country. There are several Supreme Court decisions that hold citizens have no constitutional guarantee of protection by police (South v. Maryland and Castle Rock v. Gonzalez come immediately to mind), and many more decisions have been made at lower levels (in the case of Warren v. District of Columbia, for example, the D.C. Court of Appeals ruled that “a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any individual citizen.”). Despite what Mr. Derby says, we are responsible for our individual safety. The law enforcement community performs a valuable service each and every day, but any cop will tell you that they can’t be your personal bodyguard.

Tom Derby also says, “When wolves and human predators roamed freely Northeast, one was entitled to defend one’s family and property with firearms. Circumstances have changed; we need to reconsider that entitlement.” How have circumstances changed? Derby has taught in Camden, New Jersey for 18 years. He should be all too familiar with the human predators that still roam the streets. Camden, after all, was named the most dangerous city in America for the second year in a row last year, and has been in the top ten each of the past eight years, according to Morgan Quinto, the company that ranks cities on their crime rates. In 2004 the city’s murder rate was 60.8 per 100,000 residents, more than 11 times the national average. Its robbery rate was almost 8 times the national average, and its rate of aggravated assaults were more than 4 times the national average. Yet Derby says we should no longer be entitled to defend ourselves?

Derby seems to think that if we scrapped the 2nd Amendment, all the criminals in this country would lay down their weapons. Yet the criminal element doesn’t rely on the 2nd Amendment any more than child pornographers rely on the 1st Amendment. Get rid of the right to legally own firearms, and the gang members and street thugs plaguing Camden won’t even blink. But the legal gun owners, like Ngoc Le, will pay the price.

Tom Derby appears to be a teacher who cares a great deal about his students, and he should be commended for that. In his piece, he writes about several who have fallen victim to violence. One of the students he mentions, a boy named Len, was an “A” student who eventually joined a gang. Derby writes, “I lost track of Len, and a colleague brought me the bad news before the papers got it: He had become a professional assassin, and his own gang killed him and set his body on fire in a football field in North Camden.”

But Derby seems to be blaming Len’s death on an inanimate object, rather than the human beings who took Len’s life. Nothing is said about Len’s choices in life that placed him directly in the path of violence. In the end, Derby says it’s not a person responsible for Len’s death, but a thing.

It’s easy to take this approach. We don’t have to think ill of the dead, wondering why they chose a life of crime instead of a life inside the boundaries of the law. We don’t have to be angry with them for inflicting violence on others, because it’s not their fault. The devil didn’t make them do it, the gun did. But if we’re going to make excuses for the criminal behavior of those we love, we can’t expect them to change their ways.

My wife lived in Camden for nine years, and if she and I had never met, there’s a good chance that my 15-year old stepson would have been in Mr. Derby’s class. I know my wife would be glad that he had a teacher who cared about him, but she’d be livid knowing that his teacher thought she should be disarmed so she couldn’t protect her family from the wolves roaming the streets. I don’t think Mr. Derby is a bad man, just horribly misguided.

[Blue Jays]

Hi C.P.-

"...I don't own a gun, and haven't since I was 16 or so and last played around with a pellet gun. At this time, there is no need for me to own a gun. If I have to live in a scum neighborhood, or if I have a family, I'll consider whether I should buy a gun and take lessons. In any case, I'm not interested in guns. Does any of this make me a non-conservative? No, it doesn't. If you can convince me otherwise, I'll buy you a frigging arsenal of your choice..."

subsequent post:

"...Didn't mean to be snippy there. I imagine all these other FReepers out there thinking I'm some doubletalking hypocrite for not being into guns, yet calling myself a conservative. I know that isn't necessarily you..."

---

Your sincere apology is accepted. Don't sweat it even for a second.

The one notion to consider is that one doesn't want to be behind the proverbial 8-ball of needing a gun and not having it when the chips are truly down. Regardless of neighborhood, a high-quality stainless steel revolver is an excellent insurance policy that can be obtained for less than $450.00 and will last your entire lifetime and your childrens' lifetimes.

I had very liberal friends who cringed at the fact that I have always owned firearms. One night in 1997, a group of criminals attempted to invade their condominium using an ax in the mistaken belief my friends owned an expensive antique collection. The criminals had the right complex, they were just smashing the door and window of the wrong unit!

The ax blade literally came through their door like Jack Nicholson's character in The Shining and my friend used a golf club and poked it through the jagged hole to try and shove them away. Meanwhile, his girlfriend was throwing hardcover books at their broken rear window and screaming to keep the criminals from climbing through. They never had an opportunity to dial 9-1-1 since it all happened so quickly.

Apparently someone else in the complex heard the commotion and called the police while they were busy fighting for their lives. The goblins heard the sirens and screeching of tires and that is when they decided to scatter. My friends estimated there were three or four men trying to gain access to their home. None of them were caught by the police.

These people are now gunowners. They keep their 4" .357 Magnum revolver loaded and stored in a quick-access box. It gets cleaned on a monthly basis and only taken to the range annually because they're still not enthusiasts...but they recognize how that tool could someday save their lives. They learned their lesson the hard way and were very lucky.

~ Blue Jays ~

[Beckwith]

The premise of the Second Amendment, the need for minutemen, no longer exists. In a free society we must rely on the police. We have more important rights to fight for than the right to bear arms.”

The Right to Bear Arms exists to defend us from an unjust government, just like the British government of the 18th century.

Bearing that in mind, it's easy to understand why those in government work diligently to deny us that defense.

[Khepera]

These people don't deserve to live

[ApplegateRanch]

I understand that Soviet Russia had a lot of police, and no right to own guns. Boy, look how great that turned out.

Yes, but those were Com'nists; America is a democratsy, so that would never happen here.

The Poe-LEESE is my friend...Mr. Derby done teached me so!

He also teached me that will never change, so longs we keeps voting foah DEM-crats, 'stead of them FASHIST 'Publ'cans, like that Hitler Booosh that wants to re-enslave us all.

Mistah Derby is a good teachah!

Gottah go now; my ho called & needs mo crack foah a custmer.

[proudofthesouth]

My tag line says it all.

[Zeon Cowboy]

[ApplegateRanch]

BS. State after state has passed concealed-carry laws in just the last few years.

And BS right back. If ANY "progress" had been made, NOBODY would have to beg permission to carry, concealed, or otherwise.

[from occupied ga]

What about all the concealed-carry laws that have been passed lately?

These is a good point and one I expected you to bring up, but these are "privileges" rather than rights. If you have to ask and receive permission from the government to do an activity then the activity is a privilege not a right.

In essence the "brady" (may that evil whore rot in hell forever) background check converted the entire gun buying process from a right into a privilege. The problem with privileges is that they can be withdrawn at any time for any reason or for no reason at the whim of any bureaucrat.

[ApplegateRanch]

They keep their 4" .357 Magnum revolver loaded and stored in a quick-access box. It gets cleaned on a monthly basis and only taken to the range annually because they're still not enthusiasts...but they recognize how that tool could someday save their lives. They learned their lesson the hard way and were very lucky.

I have to politely disagree. They did NOT learn.

If, They never had an opportunity to dial 9-1-1 since it all happened so quickly, then it also happened too fast to retrieve a weapon from a lock-box.

[California Patriot]

That's fine. Always ready to discuss or explain.

[Lancey Howard]

I don’t think Mr. Derby is a bad man, just horribly misguided.

Okay, no tapdancing from me - - Derby is a sick, pathetic ignoramus. Teachers like him are the reason parents who love their children must keep them far, far away from the government schools.

[Shooter 2.5]

We have King George II promising to sign any gun control that crosses his desk. The people whose guns were stolen by the New Orleand police haven't gotten them back yet and probably won't.

Your defeatist attitude ignores the fact George Bush signed the Firearm Manufacturer's Protection Act. The NRA is also suing to get those guns back to their rightful owners without your help.

The NRA-Four million members doing the work 76 million gun owners are too lazy to do.

[sneakers]

And this man's opinion is important because?..........

[California Patriot]

I said that if I lived in a scum neighborhood or had a family to worry about, I'd reconsider. That is not "uninterested" in self-defense.

I am, however, uninterested in guns. If I chose to own one, I'd become interested just enough to know what I needed to know. I own a stereo and a cell phone, and know how they work and what to do with them, but am uninterested in either.

None of this should have needed explanation, but obviously it does.

[California Patriot]

A good cautionary tale. I'll remember it.

[thoughtomator]

That's an interpretation of "uninterested" I have not seen previously. I'm not a big gun enthusiast but I made damn sure I knew how to fire one accurately. Might be needed one day to defend our country on our own soil.

[from occupied ga]

Your defeatist attitude ignores the fact George Bush signed the Firearm Manufacturer's Protection Act.

BFD

The NRA-Four million members doing the work 76 million gun owners are too lazy to do<

Half a dozen legislative lobbysts doing the compromising that the 4 million members aren't told about.

[California Patriot]

For Christ's sake. Don't you understand means that "progress" simply means "improvement," not that a situation is ideal?

You've pointed out that gun laws aren't ideal.
I've pointed out that in many states, they've gotten better. How the hell is that not progress?

You can say it's very slight progress, or that things have been getting words in other respects with gun laws. But to say that there's no progress because we shouldn't have had to pass concealed-carry in the first place is illogical.
What you mean is, the situation wasn't and isn't ideal. No argument there. But here as elsewhere, perfectionism is counter-productive.

[Old Student]

"How does an idiot like that ever get to teach in public schools?......oops, I answered my own question.........."

Watch it! I, too, am a public school teacher. You paint with an awfully broad brush there, FRiend. You might want to notice that this is in an eastern city. Somewhat farther west, we do things a little differently.

[California Patriot]

I'm not aware that the Brady Law gives bureaucrats a blank check to deny weapon ownership "at any time for any reason," let alone "for no reason." Is that really what it does, or is this just overheated rhetoric?