In a recent “Reader’s Voice” submission in this newspaper, Marjorie Logman stated that she knew of no other species “that is so bent on destroying its members” as the human one. Actually, there is one other species in the animal kingdom which fills the bill: Ants. If you happen to witness an ant war, dear reader, you will see savagery surpassed only by the human kind. And the only difference between the two is that ants are cannibalistic.
I am reminded of the 1954 science-fiction film, Them!, in which ants in the southwestern U.S. had been mutated by atomic testing to gigantic size. As such, they were unstoppable by ordinary methods; weapons of modern warfare had to be deployed. The film was an interesting take on warfare between the only two species on Earth capable of warfare for whatever reason.
Humans slaughter each other for a variety of reasons, desire for territory, or economic gain, and differences in skin color, or religion. What motivates ants may be a psychological need periodically to eradicate all forms of life in front of them (re: locusts).
Humans were not always mass murderers, however. They had to evolve, that is to say their weaponry had to evolve. Originally, they were limited to throwing rocks at one another or beating someone with a club. (Remember the early scenes from 2001: A Space Odyssey?) The next stage saw spears, bows-and-arrows, and slings. In the Middle Ages came the musket which morphed into the rifle; then, humans could increase their killing power. The final stage was the Gatling gun in the mid-19th Century, the forerunner of the machine-gun and its offshoot the semi-automatic rifle.
Thanks to a few injudicious decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court, the private ownership of semi-automatic rifles was legalized. It is a curious fact that 18- to 20-year-old persons are not allowed to purchase alcoholic beverages or tobacco products because they are unhealthy, but that they can purchase as many AR-15s as they can carry because it is their constitutional right to do so. Go figure!
As always, the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is invoked whenever talk of gun control arises. As always, the pro-gun advocates ignore the history behind the Second Amendment. Recently, a Republican Party member of Congress told a bald-faced lie when he stated that the Second was intended to protect citizens against an over-reaching government. Even that champion of constitutional rights, John W. Whitehead, whose deliberations you usually will find on the last page of this publication, has it all wrong. The Second does no such thing, which a careful reading will attest.
The true purpose of the Second was to provide the foundation of a citizens’ militia in cases of emergency. The newly-formed Nation could not afford to arm its voluntary army and so the “Minute Men” had to provide their own weapons, i.e. the muskets they used for hunting for food. It is what the “keep and bear” clause really meant; it did not authorize the ownership of private arsenals.
These days, we have a permanent militia, i.e. the National Guard, which is called up in cases of emergency (real or imagined). When the Guardsmen are called up, they are issued a weapon from the Guard’s Armory; this weapon is returned to the Armory when the emergency has been met. Given these facts, The Chas has suggested that the Second is obsolete and therefore needs to be repealed. But he won’t hold his breath waiting for that sunny day!
Ms Logman implies that AR-15s are not effective for hunting, or trap shooting, or protection of farm animals. I will add that they are not particularly effective against home invasion. Consider: The number of incidents of SWAT teams breaking down doors, by mistake, no less! in search of illegal drugs and/or immigrants is on the rise, and they have been known to shoot first and ask questions later. One does not need to be holding his AR-15 at the ready; a frown will do one in.
So, let’s have a drum roll for thoughts and prayers, shall we, dear reader? Or, are you tired of the inaction on the part of our so-called leaders?
Just a thought (no prayer).