Willfully Ignorant

Antis, Once Again, Conveniently Using Their Own Facts

The Second Amendment was written at a time when the United States was little more than jungle with bandits, savage Indians and wild animals that we needed to protect ourselves from. Yes, and to hunt food. We have long outgrown that kind of life.

That is all true.

But none of it has anything to do with WHY the Second Amendment was written.

1911’s Birthday and Lt. Frank Luke Jr.

Over at Empty Cases:

In celebration of the 100th anniversary of the 1911 – which is today – I thought I would share a story about the first American airman to win the Medal of Honor with a 1911 in hand.

His name was Frank Luke and when I was a young whipper-snapper I was obsessed with WWI fighter pilots. To me, Frank Luke was a hero that represented the American fighting spirit. His exploits left such an impression on me I named my first son “Luke”

But that’s not important. What is important is what Lt. Frank Luke accomplished in 18 days and how his life ended on 29, September 1918.

Go check it out.

The 2A is a ‘Complication’

Sebasitan writes about a Car Analogy Epic Fail in the New York Times by Nicholas D. Kristof. Now, one of the Murdoc’s favorite pastimes is discussing gun control with those who say gun ownership should be like car ownership and make all sorts of driver’s license analogies. Good times.

But this is Murdoc’s favorite bit of the Kristof op-ed:

Granted, the Second Amendment complicates gun regulation (I accept that the framers intended for state militias, and possibly individuals, to have the right to bear flintlocks). [emphasis Murdoc’s]

First, I love it how the self-evident God-given rights of all humans which are merely legally guaranteed in the US Constitution are simply “complications” when they don’t fit the view of the critic. Those pesky human rights; if not for all of that life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness jazz, we could really get things done.

Secondly, I have a true, heartfelt appreciation for the opinion a journalist who argues that Revolutionary-era documents defining what the government can and can’t do only meant as applicable to Revolutionary-era technology and society. Especially when he argues it on the internet.

“Arms” in the Second Amendment means “flintlocks only” as much as “freedom…of the press” in the First Amendment means “set and printed on hand-operated presses and distributed via horse-drawn transport and manual labor.”

As I noted on Sebastian’s blog, I doubt that Kristof is really that dumb or really believes any of that. He just thinks his readers are and that he can get away with it.

He goes on to argue

But even among those favoring a broader interpretation, the Second Amendment hasn’t prevented bans on machine guns

Which is sort of meaningless because “those favoring a broader interpretation” aren’t the ones who created the ban on machine guns. That’s like arguing that “even among those in favor of same-sex marriage, it is still illegal in most states” supports the idea that gay marriage bans are legally fine.

And, for the record, Murdoc thinks the Founding Fathers meant machine guns, bayonet lugs, pistol grips, and shoulder things that go up.