second amendment

( I wrote an email to a friend on the East Coast recently, stipulating why I thought that Maryland Gun Control Laws ... which my friend found so onerous ... was anethema to my mind.  After I finished,  I realized that this was a good "First Draft" of a explanation of my own support of the Second Amendment.  This is that draft, with the personal information removed.  Yes, it's still a rough-cut, and I probably won't provide a finished draft.  Perhaps it's something that you can kick around and "make it better".  Please ignore the crude transitions as I tried to make clear, it's all just a stream-of-consciousness letter to a friend; it's not intended to be an UberPost. )

REGISTRATION
Registration is the first step, the second step is confiscation.  California proved that decades ago.  Citations are available, but we don't care to go into the details.

Also, Registration means that the state knows "who has what".  None of their business.  The Federal NCIC (National Criminal Identification Center) ensures that "bad guys" can't buy guns; if you buy one, and pass the NCIC test ... that proves you're not a bad guy.  The Feds are prohibited from keeping the details of any firearms transaction, or using that data for ANY purpose other than identifying criminals who try to buy a gun, and prosecuting them.  "Good Guys" data is deleted in a matter of days.

So, NCIC is designed to support current federal law, which says that felons can't own guns.  That's the sole purpose.

It is NOT intended to be the first step toward registration. 

States Rights notwithstanding, states can NOT violate constitutional law.  See the Second Amendment.  (For that matter, see the First Amendment, and everything else .. including the little-known Third Amendment, which prevents both states and feds from quartering soldiers in your home;  one of the primary issues which lead to the American Revolution.)

"THE RIGHT ... TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED".  That means that the feds (and therefore, the states) can't xxxx (mess) with it.  At all.  States and municipalities have recently been slapped down for attempting to INFRINGE this right; see "Heller", for a start.

Recently, there have been challenges to the degree in which that amendment is applicable to the states.  Supreme Court decisions have supported the constitutional right of all non-felonious citizens to own firearms .. at least in their homes.  The current Left-Wing mantra is "what do you need a (military styled firearm) for, anyway?"  The answer to that is embedded in the Miller Decision (193???), in which a judge decided (in an uncontested case .. the  chargee was a bootlegger who had a shotgun) that the right of a citizen to own as short-barreled shotgun was not protected because it was not a "military arm".  Actually, if the guy charged would have shown up for his trial .. he would have easily proven that the U.S. Army used short-barreled shotguns (then called "Trench Guns") during WWI.  The odd thing is, that according to MILLER .. only military type firearms are DEFINITIVELY protected by the Constitution.  So ... at least  one state court has defended the right to keep Military arms, which sets a precedent.

(All of this stuff is being written "off the cuff", so I'm not providing links to the specific court cases.  You can look them up, for your own edification.  Since this is only a once-over-lightly "overview", I hope you will be comfortable with accepting that what I say is based on research; perhaps it may even be more effective if you do the research yourself, so you don't think I'm just smoking you here.)

SECOND AMENDMENT:
Look at the test of the "badly worded" amendment:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

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.

That curious comma has been the subject of a lot of discussion.  Bear in mind that the Colonists in 18th-century America had experienced a lot of problems with the "standing army"imposed upon them by the British.  (Remember the reference to the 3rd Amendment, earlier?  Those folks did NOT like British Troops!)  So, the point of a "well regulated militia" is not a casual, throw-away line as some people interpret it to be today. Instead, the founders and the authors of the Constitution were saying:

"We don't like an army telling us what we should and shouldn't do, so we're going to have our OWN guns .. and if those Limey Bastards get in our face again, we'll blow them all to HELL!"
(But they said it as nicely as they could ... and made damn sure it got into their constitution!)

Remember the shot heard 'round the world?  Remember Concord?  Those Limey Bastards had confiscated our rifles, and locked them up in their armory.  We took 'em back!  And when they came to get our rifles from us again .. we blew them all to HELL!

__________________________


So, what's the point of all this?  Not that we're wanting to get into another Revolutionary War, for damned sure!

We just want to avoid the entire unpleasant experience. 

Say, rather:  "You run the government, and we'll keep our guns.  We'll accept a few silly little laws, but don't touch our guns because ... well, remember Concord?"

And THAT is why the Second Amendment is so important.  It's not about hunting.  It's not about personal defense.  Even though those are part of it .........
... it's about Government Gone Wild.


So, I don't like registration; makes it easier to confiscate, and then we have to fight to get our guns back.