Who "Owns" the Second Amendment?

Who “owns” the Second Amendment and all of its broad language about guns? 

Many hardcore gun owners and extreme right-wingers will tell you how they have exclusive privilege under the amendment. They argue that any change or reform to gun rights is strictly forbidden by the Second Amendment.

However, it's no longer the 1790s when the right to keep and bear arms under the Second Amendment was ratified as part of the Bill of Rights: no longer times when militias are deemed necessary in apprehension about a new national government and in order to protect the security of each state.

It's 2022, and America is in the throes of a gun violence epidemic in which gun-related deaths – preventable, intentional, and undetermined – total over 45,000 a year (2020). Now, so-called “militias” include 3 Percenters, Oath Keepers, and Proud Boys – groups of nationalists, White supremacists, and fervent, heavily armed extremists.

Who “owns” the Second Amendment?

ALL U.S. citizens do, not just those who employ weapons. The rights afforded by the Amendment, including any restrictions, relate to every one of us from the unborn child to the oldest senior. And, every one of us can exert the freedom of determining what that birthright entails, no matter how badly some want to forbid us that privilege.

Examining the facts, we can see that the gun lobby and the politicians who let themselves be bought by gun manufacturers and the NRA claim sole, powerful control of the Constitution. They do so in order to influence voters. They employ irrational fears that any reform means the confiscation of all firearms and severe limitations concerning the types of weapons they may use for lawful purposes.

Writing in the October 16, 2017 New Yorker, Amy Davidson Sorkin – journalist and award-winner writer – says, “Too many politicians treat the gun lobby and other donors as their true constituents, even though polls show that a majority of Americans would support common-sense gun legislation.”

U.S. citizens have the right to own and carry firearms, but that doesn't mean all gun control is unconstitutional. Like most constitutional rights, the Second Amendment rights are not unlimited.

Former Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court Warren Burger argued that the sale, purchase, and use of guns should be regulated just as automobiles and boats are regulated; such regulations would not violate the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

Chief Justice Burger said …

“Americans have a right to defend their homes, and nothing should undermine this right; nor does anyone question that the Constitution protects the right of hunters to own and keep sporting guns for hunting anymore than anyone would challenge the right to own and keep fishing rods and other equipment for fishing.

“Neither does anyone question the right of citizens to keep and own an automobile. Yet there is no strong interest by the citizenry in questioning the power of the State to regulate the purchase or the transfer of such a vehicle and the right to license the vehicle and the driver with reasonable standards. It is even more desirable for the State to have reasonable regulations for the ownership and use of a firearm in an effort to stop mindless homicidal carnage.”

(Justice Warren Burger. “Second Amendment Does Not Guarantee the Right To Own a Gun.” From Gun Control, P 99-102, 1992, Charles P Cozic, ed.)

District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court ruling that the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution protects an individual's right to keep and bear arms, unconnected with service in a militia, for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home, and that the District of Columbia's handgun ban and requirement that lawfully owned rifles and shotguns be kept "unloaded and disassembled or bound by a trigger lock" violated this guarantee.

The ruling also stated that the right to bear arms is not unlimited and that guns and gun ownership would continue to be regulated. It was the first Supreme Court case to decide whether the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms for self-defense or if the right was intended for state militias.

(District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570. 2008.)

Also, consider this:

According to one study, in 94 percent of those cases, courts have found that reasonable gun regulations didn’t violate the Second Amendment. They’ve mostly relied on the Heller Court’s explanation that its ruling shouldn’t “cast doubt” on several longstanding gun restrictions, including bans on gun ownership by certain individuals (like felons), prohibitions on some types of “dangerous and unusual weapons,” limits on carrying firearms in certain public places, and requirements for gun sales.

The highest court in the land ruled that the Second Amendment is NOT unlimited. Those who continue to claim that any restriction goes against the Constitution empower the false narrative to influence one-way thinking and even promote illegal resistance. In a time when false narratives and conspiracy theories gain considerable traction through social media, impressionable minds choose to believe what they want to believe and not necessarily the truth.

Cognitive dissonance describes the mental discomfort that results from holding two conflicting beliefs, values, or attitudes. People predictably tend to seek consistency in their attitudes and perceptions, so this conflict causes feelings of unease or discomfort.

Then, a inconsistency between what they believe and how they behave motivates them to engage in actions that will help minimize feelings of discomfort.

Many suffer from severe cognitive dissonance in this age of political and social division. In times of change, they want to find any and all support for their views to justify feelings of fragility. Gun manufacturers, the NRA, and well-paid politicians continue to push narratives about constitutionality that are just NOT true.

Conclusion

I am so tired of being bludgeoned with the Second Amendment by those who believe it is some kind of sacred document sealed in its own archaic, confusing language – an emendation they claim no one has the right to question. Given that type of constitutional thinking, slavery would still exist, women would not have the right to vote, and alcohol would still be outlawed. Any constitution must be a living document for ALL, not a stagnant set of declarations for SOME.

To whomever it may concern: I, too, own the Second Amendment. So, my friend, I can also say, “Don't tread on me.” No matter my view, don't you attempt to push what you don't understand down my throat.

Weaponry Quatrain

By Hans Ostrom (2021)

How shall we manage our
Weapons? With fear.
How shall we manage our
Fear? With weapons. Oh, dear.