Oprah Supports the 2nd Amendment?
On Thursday, Oprah stood before the graduating class at Harvard in Cambridge, Mass to deliver this year’s commencement address. During her speech she took on the issue of stricter background checks for firearms purchases. She said, “We understand that the vast majority of people in this country believe in stronger background checks, because they realize that we can uphold the 2nd Amendment and reduce the violence that is robbing us of our children. They don’t have to be incompatible.” This blind obsession for stricter background checks has had me thinking, and conversing, with individual on both sides of this debate ever since it became the part of the talking points after Sandy Hook. The only reason I can see for its continued pursuit is that it is the last ditch effort for the Progressives to squeeze in some sort of added restriction on the 2nd Amendment (since the assault weapons ban fell apart). Remember, Progressives count success in inches, not feet. As long as they are moving forward towards their end goal they are happy with any victory, no matter how small. But I’m left asking all of you, do background checks on firearm purchases need to be stricter and are they necessary at all?
When the Progressives began infiltrating the Federal government in the early 1900’s they began adding “buts” to the 2nd Amendment and other areas of our Constitution. Slowly, but steadily, we have had our freedoms as American citizens eroded and we have surrendered them to the daily maintenance of bureaucrats. Few people realize that before 1934 you could purchase a fully automatic firearm and have it delivered to your doorstep by the US Post Office. Some years later, background checks became Federal law for all point-of-purchase firearm sales (individual sales did not fall under this law) with the Gun Control Act of 1968. Understanding this historical information, I was surprised when I asked the question to individuals, who I considered strict supporter of the 2nd Amendment, about their views on background checks. Most of them do not support stricter background checks, but many did say that our society has changed and they don’t think we should repeal the Gun Control Act of 1968 and eliminate background checks. I counter by asking them, “So since our society has changed, you are willing to sacrifice your Liberty and freedom for the misdeeds of the criminal minority?” Spirited debate ensues.
Parable time so the masses can gain wisdom; the internet allows any moron (like Mr. Ags) to post an article/video for the entire world to view. One day the Federal government decides they need to require Mr. Ags to go through a licensing/education process to make certain that he understands the consequences of the words/media that he might use in his articles. We wouldn’t want someone to make a poorly produced movie about the life of the Prophet Mohammed that would cause “spontaneous riots” in Libya after all. Now you would rightfully say, “The 1st Amendment gives us freedom of speech and the press and the government cannot restrict that right.” To which I would say, “Yes, but ‘society has changed’ and so must the 1st Amendment and the Liberties granted therein.” Given this line of thought, I have developed what I feel is a logical stance on stricter background checks and current background checks that many will not agree with: abolish “all” background checks for firearm purchases.
Think about it, our country was founded on the principle of individual freedoms and rights. We are considered innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Background checks make us guilty until proven innocent to partake in a right granted to us in the Constitution. If you are a citizen of the United States your rights shall not be infringed, unless you do something to warrant your losing those rights. Your race, education, religion, marital status, sexual preference, socioeconomic status, past criminal record (if you paid your debt to society), or what political party you align yourself with should not matter when it comes to enjoying these rights and freedoms.
With no background checks, some criminals and mentally disturbed individuals would purchase firearms. However, they are already doing this, or stealing them, anyway. Since this is happening some are saying, “We need stricter background checks on every firearm sale, including retail and private transfers.” When you hear this, just replace it with, “Surrender your freedom for the illegal actions of others.” Isn’t that what is really being said, when you cut away all the rhetoric? I encourage you to reconsider your support of firearm background checks and any current/proposed law that would punish the rights and freedoms of law-abiding citizens for the actions of criminals.
Mr. Ags writes for Joe for America and welcomes your feedback: @blackswampradio & [email protected]