"Farming needs to stop…" https://t.co/PPxN51dApg
— Dr Jordan B Peterson (@jordanbpeterson) March 5, 2023
Category: Education & Schools
MSU professor illustrates problem with gun control advocates
The state of Michigan was likely to adopt gun control either this year or next regardless of any other factor. The shooting at Michigan State University, however, simply provided a handy pretext for anti-gun voices to rally around.
A prime example is one professor who issued his own call for gun control recently.
Marco Díaz-Muñoz, an assistant professor at Michigan State University whose classroom was attacked by a gunman, encouraged Michigan lawmakers Thursday to do the “right thing” and the “humane thing” by enacting new gun control measures.
Díaz-Muñoz, 64, was teaching a class in Berkey Hall about Cuban cultural identity on Feb. 13 when the gunman opened fire, killing two students. For the entirety of the evening, the mass shooting on the university campus in East Lansing left three students dead and wounded five others.
It was the darkest event of Díaz-Muñoz’s life, he told members of the Michigan Senate’s Civil Rights, Judiciary, and Public Safety Committee.
“Before the tragic events at MSU, I was already a supporter of sensible gun control laws,” Díaz-Muñoz said. “However, my experience that night has strongly solidified my belief that gun control laws are an absolute necessity to stop the senseless killings that occur on a daily basis in this country.”
First, I have to ask, how many people think a college professor at a major university teaching “cultural identity” didn’t support gun control before the shooting happened? Show of hands.
Yeah, kind of what I thought.
Of course, he kind of admits that when he says it “solidified” his belief, but anyway, that’s not what I want to talk about anyway.
See, Díaz-Muñoz’s comments are predicated on something that gun control advocates have seemingly been basing all their rhetoric on for years.
It’s like they actually think we agree that gun control works.
There’s nothing in Díaz-Muñoz’s comments that suggests that he’s trying to convince anyone that regulation is the right course of action. Instead, it looks as if, in his mind, the matter is already settled.
Look, “everybody knows” is a terrible way to argue in favor of something. It’s a pretty good Leonard Cohen song, but a terrible way to argue.
Now, Díaz-Muñoz is just one example, but he’s far from the first.
Anti-gunners love to stomp and scream that we need to pass gun control, and that failing to do so will result in “senseless killings” and such, but there’s no real argument there. There’s nothing to convince those of us who disagree to change our minds.
Unless, of course, they actually think we believe gun control works and are refusing to embrace it because of other reasons.
And even if I thought gun control worked, I’d likely still oppose it because our rights cannot be set aside so easily.
Yet I don’t think it works. Quite the contrary, actually, I’ve seen ample evidence to believe it doesn’t. But the arguments never seem to address this. For many of them, it’s a foregone conclusion, a universal truth, that gun control stops mass shootings.
Never you mind about the two in California just days apart. Don’t talk about how it failed to stop either them or the Buffalo killer, as just a couple of examples. No, those are irrelevant and you shouldn’t fret about those cases.
Instead, you should just…what? Take their word? Take the word of seriously flawed and biased studies?
Well, we don’t. We’re unconvinced, and when Díaz-Muñoz simply demand that we capitulate and give up our rights for their peace of mind, well, we’re even less convinced.
But this is what the gun control side’s arguments typically are. They’re people stomping and screaming like spoiled children because we won’t do what they tell us to, and about the only reason I can find for them to do such is because they think their position is so self-evident that they don’t need to defend it.
They’re quite wrong.
Get woke, go broke.
Christian school that embraced the LGBTQ community is forced to close its doors
A conflict over what it means to be Christian is forcing a school in Kansas City, Missouri, to close.
Urban Christian Academy is a private, K-8 school with an enrollment of 100 that describes itself as providing “a tuition-free, high-quality, Christ-centered education for low-income students.”
The school’s mission statement has always stressed inclusivity in general terms, noting that following Jesus “opens up doors and makes room at the table.” But last year it added a paragraph to its website, which read in part, “We are an affirming school. We stand with the LGBTQIA+ community and believe in their holiness. We celebrate the diversity of God’s creation in all its varied and beautiful forms.”
According to the school, that update prompted donors to stop contributing, many of them citing their interpretation of Christianity as the reason. Now, UCA has announced it will close at the end of the school year due to the loss of financial support.
Kalie Callaway-George, UCA’s executive director and co-founder, said this new language “is kind of what started the backlash from our donor base, which we anticipated. It was just that we anticipated a 50% loss in funding and made adjustments for that. We had an 80% loss in funding and that was too much to overcome.”
The dramatic drop-off in donations came quickly. Soon after the new language appeared on the school’s website, eight churches withdrew their support. Although those institutions were responsible for just 2% of the school’s funding, church members were a donor base that gave much more.
This is why you don’t hire graduates of Ivy League snob schools. Those colleges deal in snobbery and networking, not actual education.
— Mike OTDP (@Hammerli280) February 27, 2023
The West Virginia Governor will sign the campus carry bill on Wednesday
So nice when they provide such clear photography for future positive ID
The presidents of West Virginia University and Marshall University penned a joint letter to legislators opposing the bill in late January.
“We believe that our boards of governors are best suited to decide whether guns should be permitted on campus,” the letter reads. “We therefore do not support statewide campus carry.”
The presidents of West Virginia State University, Concord University and Shepherd University wrote a separate letter saying they strongly support the Second Amendment but “have serious reservations about the significant public safety challenges” that the bill would present.
“Introducing firearms into this already challenging environment could have unintended consequences,” the letter says, referencing increased suicide rates and concern that the presence of firearms could stifle the free exchange of ideas.
West Virginia Public Broadcasting reported that at a public hearing last week, 40 people spoke and nearly everyone opposed the bill.
Marshall University professor Chris White said the bill doesn’t have enough safety measures in place. Formerly a Marine Corps infantryman, he referenced months of training that military and police officers go through “to earn that Second Amendment right and carry those weapons in public.”
“None of those safety controls will be imposed on our students or anybody else who comes on to campus,” White said, according to WVPB.
Arizona Wants to Use Public Schools to Demystify and Destigmatize Guns
The Arizona House of Representatives is working hard to secure gun rights for the citizens of the Grand Canyon State. It has so far passed a slew of bills that include legalizing gun silencers and allowing parents to carry firearms on school campuses. Another bill that is raising eyebrows is HB 2332, which will require middle and high schools to offer training on how to properly handle a firearm. According to Arizona’s local NPR, parents would still be able to opt out. But even with this provision, groups like Moms Demand Action and Civic Engagement Beyond Voting are speaking out against the measure.
PHOENIX – Arizona’s House of Representatives is continuing to advance a bill requiring public middle and high schools in Arizona to offer training on the proper handling of firearms.
Rep. Selina Bliss, R-Prescott, who sponsored HB 2332, said she wants children to learn proper firearms handling from experts to stop accidental deaths, and denied that the bill was about training children to use firearms.
I was lucky this phobia wasn’t around when I was in school, because I spent a lot of my time in high school art class sketching guns.
Banning My Son From Doodling A Gun Is Not A Solution To School Shootings
The only thing more predictable than boys being fascinated with weapons is them eventually sketching one in class. But that’s not allowed anymore.
What is it that makes a little boy — practically straight out of the womb — take an interest in weapons and emulate gun-toting, swash-buckling heroes? Even doctors aren’t sure. As one pediatrician told me about my then 16-month-old son who turned every stick into a sword, “We don’t know why. They just do it.”
If you’ve raised a little boy, you know what I’m talking about. And the only thing more predictable than them being fascinated with weapons is them eventually doodling one in class. An alien with a laser gun. An elf with a sword. Rambo with a machine gun.
When they do, they’ll encounter a host of school polices banning images of weapons, ostensibly to prevent school shootings and other violence. Some make exceptions for historical context (such as a Revolutionary War soldier with a bayonet).
Others don’t. Who can forget the infamous Pop-Tart gun of 2016? The 7-year-old was suspended.
If your child is lucky, he’ll be told to put the drawing away. If he’s unlucky, he’ll be sent to the principal’s office and then to the school counselor, where he may even be given a suicide assessment.
No Drawings with Guns Allowed
My first encounter with this type of policy was when my youngest boy came home from a Fairfax County, Virginia, elementary school with his shirt inside out. On the front was an image of a Lego Ewok holding — eek! — a tiny axe.
I recently encountered this policy again with my 10-year-old son. He had gotten in trouble for drawing a police officer holding a gun. A police officer.
In an email, my son’s teacher said she explained to him that drawing weapons in class is not allowed and encouraged him to “stick to dragons and landscapes.”
West Virginia Governor Announces Support for Newly Passed Campus Carry Bill: ‘I’ll Sign It’
The Mountain State will soon be the latest to allow those with permits to carry concealed guns on college campuses.
On Tuesday, the West Virginia House of Delegates put the finishing touches on Senate Bill 10. By Wednesday, Governor Jim Justice (R.) announced his intention to sign it into law once it reaches his desk.
“I know it’s controversial, but from my standpoint, here’s where I stand: I stand rock solid with our Second Amendment,” Justice said during a press conference Wednesday. “When this bill comes to me, it won’t be with me but just a matter of seconds because I’ll sign it.”
Once signed, the bill will make West Virginia one of twelve states to allow gun carry in most areas of campus without an option for school officials to implement gun bans. It arrives at a time of heightened scrutiny over gun carry after the Supreme Court’s June decision in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen recognized a constitutional right to carry a gun in public for self-defense. Many blue states have rushed to pass laws cracking down on public gun carry in response to the ruling. Meanwhile, red states have continued to expand where civilians can carry in public and sought to eliminate permitting requirements.
Governor Justice cited frequent mass shootings across the country committed by “bad, bad, bad actors” that occur on “soft targets” as his reasoning for supporting the bill.
“God forbid, but it may very well be that we’ve got somebody on that campus that has a firearm and something bad starts to happen, and they save a bunch of lives,” he said.
Armed bystanders have intervened to stop or prevent mass shootings on numerous occasions throughout the country. Elisjsha Dicken returned fire against a shooter in July 2022 ending an attack on an Indiana mall food court. Similarly, a legally-armed bystander shot a gunman at an El Paso, Texas mall earlier this month.
He also pointed to long-standing campus carry laws in states like Texas that have been on the books “for years and years” to show that the policy can be implemented safely.
The bill would not prevent schools from instituting any and all restrictions on campus carry. But school officials would be limited to baring guns in buildings and other parts of campus with comprehensive security measures, such as metal detectors. Those provisions, however, were not enough to win over opponents of the bill. Some pointed to the recent mass shooting at Michigan State, where an adult not affiliated with the school shot and killed three students on campus, to argue against the bill.
Marshall University student E.T. Bowen said college students already feel “terrified on campus,” and adding more guns would exacerbate that.
“This bill is like throwing kerosene on the wildfire, and it is appalling that we even need to say that while there’s still blood on the ground at Michigan State,” Bowen said.
The bill’s supporters also pointed to prior mass shootings on college campuses. Delegate Mike Honaker (R.) was a state trooper who responded to the 2007 Virginia Tech shooting. He said the prospect of something like that happening again compelled him to give students a chance to defend themselves.
“Please hear me: Years ago, I sat on the foot of my bed with Windex and paper towels and I washed the blood of almost 30 kids off of my shoes because of an active shooter on a college campus,” he said, according to the Associated Press. “I fear that if I do not support this legislation, and it happens again, washing their blood off my shoes will not compare to trying to wash the blood off of my hands.”
The bill ultimately passed overwhelmingly on an 84-14 vote. Once signed, it will take effect on July 1, 2024.
I don’t care what your education level is, it does not trump the rights of parents or the sovereign nature of the family as established by God!
— Jerrod Sessler for Congress '24 🇺🇸 (@Sessler) February 19, 2023
The US Supreme Court confirms (repeatedly) that parents have the primary right and responsibility for the upbringing and education of their children — no matter what their religion (including none).
That fundamental right is unassailable unless proven abuse/neglect.— IKSendlerC (@IkSendler) February 21, 2023
Larry Hogan is essentially saying that setting standards for education, which he supports, is fine so long as conservatives are not the ones setting those standards. Then it becomes a problem. This is not a good position to take. https://t.co/XJfl41RSHh
— Erick Erickson (@EWErickson) February 19, 2023
Wanna bet they have their pronouns memorized?
Not a single student can do math at grade level in 53 Illinois schools. For reading, it’s 30 schools
Spry Community Links High School, in the Heart of Little Village in Chicago, says its vision is to “provide a challenging and supportive environment…to enable our students to succeed in the 21st century.” Number one on the school’s focus list? “Increasing reading and math scores to or above grade level.”
But a look at state data that tracks reading and math scores for each Illinois school reveals two frightening facts about Spry. Not a single one of its 88 kids at the school can read at grade level. It’s the same for math. Zero kids are proficient.
Spry is one of 30 schools in Illinois where not a single student can read at grade level. Twenty-two of those schools are part of the Chicago Public Schools and the other eight are outside Chicago.
The failure list in math is even longer. There are 53 schools statewide where not one kid is proficient in math.
Why are “gun safety” activists opposed to teaching real gun safety?
Even though groups like Everytown and Moms Demand Action have tried to rebrand themselves as “gun safety advocates” and not anti-gun activists, their definition of “gun safety” boils down to “don’t own a gun.” When it comes to actual training and education, the gun prohibitionists tend to demand a host of mandates for would-be gun owners; requirements that seem less designed to improve safety and more to make it a difficult and burdensome process to exercise your right to keep and bear arms.
When it comes to educating kids about how to be safe and responsible around firearms, however, anti-gunners adopt a strident abstinence-based approach; don’t even mention firearms, and certainly don’t use programs like the NRA’s Eddie Eagle GunSafe program to teach younger kids that if they ever see a gun they should stop, don’t touch, run away, and tell a grown-up. Not because that’s bad advice, but because it’s coming from the NRA.
The anti-education ideology of the gun control lobby is on full display in Kansas, where lawmakers are debating a bill that would allow school districts to adopt a firearms safety and education curriculum for K-12 grades and self-proclaimed gun safety advocates are now demanding kids be kept intentionally ignorant, lest they be brainwashed into supporting the Second Amendment when they’re older.
Moriah Day, executive director of the Kansas State Rifle Association, said the state affiliate of the NRA requested reintroduction of the bill because establishing a unified curriculum for firearm education in public schools was “the only way to counteract the dangerous perspective many young people have from learning about firearms only through violent and careless examples on display across pop culture.”
He said the NRA approach was pragmatic because it acknowledged firearms were part of preparation for dangers of everyday life in the way advice was shared about the being safe while swimming, using electrical outlets or around fire hazards.
Johnson County resident Ephren Taylor III also addressed the Senate committee, but pointed to research indicating the Eddie Eagle program was “absolutely ineffective.” He said lobbying for firearm training in Kansas public schools was part of a campaign to build support for the NRA.
“Let’s be honest,” Taylor said. “We know why we’re choosing the NRA’s program. It’s not about gun safety. It’s about promoting the NRA to young kids so when they grow up they say, ‘Oh, Eddie Eagle. I remember him.’ You want to indoctrinate young kids into loyal NRA supporters.”
Under the Senate bill, the state Board of Education would be compelled to establish curriculum guidelines for firearm safety training conforming to programs offered by the NRA and Department of Wildlife and Parks. A local school board would make the final decision about whether to offer students instruction in gun safety.
If adopted in the 2023 legislative session, the statute would take effect July 1 and the new firearm programs could begin this fall. The Senate bill would require nearly 500,000 students in Kansas schools be afforded an opportunity to study how to responsibly deal with a gun. The anticipated annual cost of the program to the state would be $70,000.
Under the bill, students in kindergarten through grade five would exclusively have access to the NRA’s trademarked Eddie Eagle program. Students in grades six through eight would be in either the Eddie Eagle curriculum or the hunter safety program of the Department of Wildlife and Parks. The state parks department’s Hunter Education In Our Schools Program would be exclusive in grades nine through 12.
The head of the Kansas branch of the National Education Association also objects to the plan, insisting that when it comes to gun safety education schools are not the proper environment, and that any such efforts “ought to be operated outside the school day and outside school buildings.”
Given that the national NEA continues lobbying for all kinds of gun control, including bans on so-called assault weapons and criminalizing firearm transfers without a federal background check, I’m pretty sure that the Kansas chapter would object to any program that doesn’t paint gun ownership in a negative light; even something that completely avoids the political debate over gun control in favor of providing simple tips that can keep kids safe. Though school districts would have to opt-in to providing these programs, even that’s too much for the teacher’s union. If the anti-gunners had their way, the only “gun safety” lessons taught in school would be the talking points of Everytown, March for Our Lives, Brady, and the like shared by educators in their classrooms.
It looks like SB 116 will soon be headed to the Senate floor, and I expect that it will pass with wide margins. So far Democrat Gov. Laura Kelly hasn’t indicated whether she’ll sign the bill if it gets to her desk, however, so a veto-proof majority may be needed if lawmakers want to help school districts provide a real education on firearms safety when kids head back to class in the fall.
Why? The public school indoctrination system
Why 65 Percent of Fourth Graders Can’t Really Read.
On Saturday, I wrote about the 230,000 children who failed to show up for class when public schools reopened after the pandemic. It’s a tragedy without parallel in American history as many of the no-shows are very young — K through 3rd grade. Critical skills learned in early education were not taught to these kids, who are now hopelessly behind.
The pandemic didn’t necessarily cause the problem. It exposed problems that already existed and were exacerbated because of incompetence and, as it turns out, wrongheaded teaching.
Consider the fact that 65% of American fourth-grade students can barely read. This is a result of a radical shift to a new way of teaching children how to read.
What was wrong with the old way? Well, it was old.
Mississippi Senate passes bill allowing teachers to be armed
Legislation that would allow public and private school teachers in the Magnolia State to be armed has passed the Mississippi Senate.
On Wednesday, Senate Bill 2079, authored by Senator Angela Hill, R-Picayune, passed after receiving 39 yea votes and 13 nay votes.
The bill would establish a School Safety Guardian Training Program, which would be administered by Mississippi Homeland Security under the umbrella of the Mississippi Department of Public Safety (DPS).
Governing bodies of school systems throughout the state would have the autonomy to determine whether or not they will participate in the program. Authorities within participating school districts would either approve or deny permission for a volunteer school employee to be involved in the program.
“If a school wants to put together an armed educator team to work with law enforcement and to be trained to basically assist in the time of an active shooter or some unfortunate situation, the framework is now in place once we get this bill through the House,” Senator Hill said on The Gallo Show.
To participate in the program, one must possess an enhanced or concealed carry permit prior to applying.
According to DPS Commissioner Sean Tindell, once qualified, those participating in the program go through a two-to-three-week training session where they are educated on tactics related to gun safety and proper interaction with the police if a crisis happened to occur.
“They would learn self-defense tactics. They would learn firearm tactics. They would learn communication with law enforcement,” Tindell said on MidDays with Gerard Gibert. “If we’re going to have teachers in schools with a firearm, they’re going to have the proper training and an interaction plan with law enforcement.”
Training would be conducted at the Mississippi Law Enforcement Officer Training Academy in Pearl and led by multiple law enforcement agencies in collaboration with one another.
Iowa student sues over 2A t-shirt suspension
An Iowa high schooler has filed a federal lawsuit alleging that her school district and a civics teacher violated her First Amendment rights by suspending her for wearing a pro-Second Amendment t-shirt to class; a case that could one day have far-reaching implications for students across the country.
In the complaint, which is the topic of today’s Bearing Arms’ Cam & Co, the student (identified by her initials A.B.) alleges that just two days after discussing students’ rights to free speech in class, teacher Thomas Griffin “removed her from class and suspended her” for wearing a t-shirt promoting the Second Amendment, claiming it was “inappropriate”.
Griffin told his students that, although they had some right to free speech, that right was “extremely limited” when the students stepped on school property. Griffin told his students that their teacher (in this case, him) would decide what was acceptable speech in the classroom. And with respect to clothing—which was at the very core of the Tinker case—Griffin told his students that he would not allow students to wear any clothing that depicts guns, alcohol, or any other “inappropriate material.”
A.B. knew that Griffin was wrong about the scope of the First Amendment, so the next time she had Griffin’s government class, September 1, 2022, she wore a shirt to school that said “What part of ‘shall not be infringed’ do you not understand?” with a depiction of a rifle underneath it.
A.B. had worn the shirt to school before, with no complaints from students, teachers, or administrators. And A.B.’s brother, who graduated from Johnston High School in 2019, had worn the same shirt to school multiple times with no complaints.
Griffin, who teaches the Bill of Rights, knew that shirt was quoting the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, and he knew it was a commentary on gun control efforts. Nevertheless, he claimed that the shirt violated the school’s dress code and he removed A.B. from the classroom, sending her to the school administration office.
A.B. told Griffin she had a right to wear the shirt, which was not causing any disruption in the class—other than any disruption Griffin himself created by removing A.B. from the classroom. But Griffin said she was wrong about the First Amendment and that the administration would back him up.
As you can see, there are no depictions of violence on the shirt worn by A.B., but the school administration did indeed originally stand by Griffin’s actions, suspending her after she refused to change her shirt in order to return to class.
The lawsuit alleges that later that evening, however, A.B.’s mom Janet Bristow received a call from the school district’s superintendent to apologize for their actions, as well as a similar mea culpa from Chris Billings, the Executive Director of School Leadership.
- Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders will sign a bill banning drag shows from areas accessible by minors in order to ‘protect kids’
- The bill would ultimately do away with drag storytime performances, which sees drag queens reading to students for free at public libraries
- It’s Sanders’ latest move amid the US culture wars after she issued limits on teaching critical race theory in schools
Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders is set to ban drag shows in order to ‘protect’ children after already cracking down on critical race theory in schools.
Sanders and her supporters said the bill, which would re-define drag shows as ‘adult-oriented performances,’ is meant to protect social values as it bans the shows from public areas with children despite outcry from the LGBTQ community.
Alexa Henning, a spokeswoman for the governor, said the bill was not aimed at ‘banning anything,’ but rather about ‘protecting kids’ from ‘sexually explicit drag shows.’
‘Only in the radical left’s woke dystopia is it not appropriate to protect kids,’ Henning told The Washington Post.
Still Need Proof of LGBT Grooming in Schools?
According to Wikipedia, “LGBT grooming” is a conspiracy theory perpetuated by “the far right.”
“Since the early 2020s, conservatives and members of the far-right, mostly in the United States, have falsely accused LGBT people, as well as their allies and progressives in general, of systematically using LGBT-positive education and campaigns for LGBT rights as a method of child grooming,” claims Wikipedia. “These accusations and conspiracy theories are characterized by experts as baseless, homophobic and transphobic, and as examples of moral panic.”
Except, they’re not baseless at all. We’ve been reporting on LGBT child grooming for some time now at PJ Media, and we know it’s not a conspiracy theory. The reason why the radical left opposes the use of the word “groomer” when we discuss Drag Queen Story Hours, transgender closets, and porn in school libraries is because the word is accurate. They don’t want us to believe that it’s happening, but it is.
The latest story comes out of Portland, Maine, where a male middle school substitute teacher who identifies as transgender intentionally shared his highly sexualized TikTok account with sixth-grade students.
According to a report from Reduxx, Chris “Lydia” Lamere “wrote his TikTok handle on the whiteboard at the front of the classroom and encouraged students to ‘check it out.’” Students proceeded to visit his page and started circulating his videos, which were suggestive and sexual in nature.
We know this is not an isolated incident. Stuff like this is happening across the country, and yet, the liberal media and big tech want to pretend that LGBT grooming is a conspiracy we just made up. It would be nice if it were made up. It would be nice not to have to worry about whether degenerates are deliberately exposing our kids to sexual content or trying to recruit them into the trans cult. According to a report from The Maine Wire, the local NBC News affiliate covered for Lamere by falsely reporting that students just happened to “discover” his TikTok account. So, not only are groomers infiltrating public schools, but the media is actually refusing to tell the real story.
That the children are apparently purposefully deluded by their instructors and not taught that SCOTUS took care of this in 2008 in Heller, simply shows that it’s not teaching, but indoctrination
Also, JIC:
The meaning of the phrase “well-regulated” in the 2nd amendment
Anti-gun op-ed by student hardly the gotcha she thinks it is
Every now and then, we see some person who thinks they’re clever, only to trot out a tired, debunked argument that they’re sure is a “gotcha” moment.
That’s especially true with anti-gun arguments, of course.
I recently came across an op-ed written by a Los Angeles high school student that treads a particularly tired argument.
Titled, “Opinion: The 2nd Amendment requires gun regulation,” you already know it’s going to be good.
How can we decrease gun violence?
According to the 2nd Amendment, since “[a] well regulated Militia [is]…necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Although people have the right to bear arms for their own protection as stated in the Constitution, the Second Amendment also clearly states that this is based on the need for a “well regulated Militia”, not based on random people being able to have guns.
This can be interpreted to mean that no one except for law enforcement should have more than a number of guns or ammunition, because the right to bear arms is for a “well regulated Militia”. People do not need 10 guns to protect themselves from danger, and they certainly won’t need a gun that can shoot 600 bullets per minute either, like the AK-47 as detailed in Britannica.
If we limit a certain amount of guns per person, making sure that gun owners are “well regulated”, then the chance of a mass shooting will be less likely as a gun owner could only own a specific amount of guns and also have “regulated” ways to use them.
I’m sure the author and her teachers are very proud of her for this argument. Too bad it’s an anti-gun argument debunked ages ago by people far better versed in constitutional law than she is.
First, the phrase “well-regulated” means “properly functioning.”
Second, the militia refers to the whole body of free people who can be called upon to defend our nation. While many argue that this means the National Guard today, if you take a look at the Militia Act, you’ll see the unorganized militia is still people within a given age range who aren’t currently serving in the military or eligible for call-up.
Further, the young author here is illustrating just how poor the American educational system actually is, because she clearly didn’t grasp the totality of the Second Amendment.
See, she’s doing what many anti-gunners do, which is focus on the militia clause. Yet the rest of the amendment read, “the people’s right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”
“[S]hall not be infringed.” That part alone debunks the entire premise on which the author based her work. It doesn’t say the right to keep and bear arms shall only be for militia purposes. It explicitly states that it shall not be interfered with by lawmakers.
I don’t blame her, though. I blame her teachers.
It seems no one adequately educated her about the context surrounding the Second Amendment. She likely was never taught about our Founding Fathers’ innate distrust of standing armies, or how they believed any government had the potential to become tyrannical unless held in check by the citizenry.
They never taught her how the Bill of Rights came to be, how many of the amendments were a direct response to actions carried out by the British, and how the Founding Fathers wanted to make sure their new nation wouldn’t go down that same road.
That includes removing arms from law-abiding citizens.
“But you don’t need 10 guns,” she argues, yet the Second Amendment doesn’t call for such anti-gun regulation as she claims. It explicitly precludes any such regulation by saying our right shall not be infringed.
It seems clear that this young woman hasn’t been taught by her teachers. Not about history and likely not even how to think for herself.