Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

"Bowing down to NRA is dangerous" [Barf Alert]
Seattle Post-Intelligencer ^ | 1/23/07 | CLIFFORD M. HERMAN

Posted on 01/25/2007 8:27:58 AM PST by kiriath_jearim

The arguments favoring the private ownership of handguns in this country are based on two myths.

The first myth is that the Second Amendment to the Constitution guarantees private citizens the right to own handguns.

The fact is this. The Second Amendment, in its entirety, 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." The National Rifle Association has succeeded brilliantly and cynically in convincing the public that the amendment consists only of the part that follows the comma.

Let us consider the context within which it was written. The country comprised only a loose arrangement of 13 separate colonies trying to get free from Britain. There was no strong central government that could raise and finance a national army. The leader, George Washington, had to rely on the willingness of each colony to send its militia of private citizens, each man carrying his own rifle, to join the effort.

It was a momentous struggle against a strong British army and its paid Hessian companions. It was only the heroic efforts of Washington's tattered volunteers that prevailed and eventually formed what would become the United States of America.

Only then did a collection of militias become what we have long known as a national militia. We call it the National Guard.

The second myth is that every private citizen needs a handgun to protect his loved ones and property against intrusion by burglars. This is a pernicious untruth. As a longtime trauma surgeon at Harborview Medical Center, the main center for treatment of all kinds of wounds and injuries, I cannot recall a single patient who had been shot by the resident of a private home while attempting to burglarize it. I believe my surgical colleagues would agree with that assessment. It is far more likely that a young boy finds a loaded handgun in his parents' bedside table and either he or a playmate gets shot while playing with it.

The other common use of handguns in private homes takes place during acts of domestic violence or drug disputes. Except in cases of convenience store holdups, gunshot wounds are administered by a family member or someone else known to the victim. We documented this well in a New England Journal of Medicine article we published as part of a comparison between Seattle and Vancouver, B.C., regarding the use of handguns.

Those are the two myths responsible for the ubiquitous presence and use of handguns in Seattle and elsewhere in this country. They attest to the ignorance of our citizens and our laziness in not even reading and learning the history of the Second Amendment to our Constitution.

After all, it is only a single sentence. That should not be too much for anyone.

The obvious truth is that only police and other law-enforcement officials should be allowed to have handguns in this country. Private citizens have no legitimate use or need for them, and they should be barred from possessing them. Period

Shame on us, for acquiescing to the NRA and to our own ignorance. We need to correct this dangerous condition.

[Clifford M. Herman, M.D., is a professor emeritus of surgery, University of Washington School of Medicine.]


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society
KEYWORDS: 2ndamendment; banglist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-102 last
To: All
What good can a handgun do against an Army?
101 posted on 02/02/2007 4:19:49 PM PST by philman_36
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: philman_36
The Second Amendment is a political issue today only because of the military reality that underlies it. Politicians who fear the people seek to disarm them. People who fear their government's intentions refuse to be disarmed. The Founders understood this. So, too, does every tyrant who ever lived. Liberty-loving Americans forget it at their peril. Until they do, American gunowners in the aggregate represent a strategic military fact and an impediment to foreign tyranny. They also represent the greatest political challenge to home-grown would-be tyrants. If the people cannot be forcibly disarmed against their will, then they must be persuaded to give up their arms voluntarily. This is the siren song of "gun control," which is to say "government control of all guns," although few self-respecting gun-grabbers would be quite so bold as to phrase it so honestly.
102 posted on 02/02/2007 4:26:44 PM PST by philman_36
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-102 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson