The Second Amendment Deserves Respect — and Responsibility
Let me start out by saying that I am a keen advocate of our Constitutional 2nd Amendment – The right to bear arms. Its origins are founded in the birth of our country and promoted by General George Washington because of the oppression and control of our citizens by King George III of England, enforced by The King’s Army, known to us as the Red Coats, as well as Loyalists Units (colonists who remained loyal to the Crown), and hired Mercenaries such as the Hessian Soldiers from Germany. At the time, Washington and the founding fathers didn’t see a need to establish an army of our own. Instead, they decided that an armed citizenry would make the best army of all. So the 2nd Amendment created a “well-regulated militia,” which would consist of “every able-bodied man in the country.”
Here is the original text of this most unique amendment ever written: A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
A frequently quoted statement, never actually substantiated, but whose sentiment applies here, is one of the reasons we have the 2nd Amendment and why it is so important: Japan’s Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto is misquoted as saying after the bombing of Pearl Harbor: “You cannot invade mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind each blade of grass.”
Though not true, the millions of armed Americans would be the largest army we have, and would make it very difficult for any country to think about invading us. As we’ve seen throughout history, when a government takes away the weapons from its citizens, all who remain are slaves…For more than any other reason, this is why we should never give up our 2nd Amendment Rights.
Interpretations of the Second Amendment
There are three predominant interpretations of the Second Amendment.
The civilian militia interpretation, which holds that the Second Amendment is no longer valid, having been intended to protect a militia system that is no longer in place.
The individual rights interpretation, which holds that the individual right to bear arms is a basic right on the same order as the right to free speech.
The median interpretation, which holds that the Second Amendment does protect an individual right to bear arms but is restricted by the militia language in some way.
Where the Supreme Court Stands
The only Supreme Court ruling in U.S. history that has focused primarily on the issue of what the Second Amendment really means is U.S. v. Miller (1939), which is also the last time the Court examined the amendment in any serious way. In Miller, the Court affirmed a median interpretation holding that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to bear arms, but only if the arms in question are those that would be useful as part of a citizen militia. Or maybe not; interpretations vary, partly because Miller is not an exceptionally well-written ruling.
Now that we’ve had our history lesson on the origins of the 2nd Amendment, let’s get into how all this actually applies in a modern application on the street. This issue has been debated ad infinitum, and we keep landing right back at the spot where all law-abiding citizens, with some restrictions and requirements, are allowed to possess and carry firearms. On the surface, this sounds good, but when you dig deep into some of the people who may carry a gun, there have been, and will continue to be, problems.
In every state, if you want to possess a firearm, you have to be of a certain age, depending on the type of weapon, and you cannot be a convicted felon. There are more, but we’ll stay with the big ones. If you wanted to carry a firearm concealed (handgun), you had to take a concealed weapons course from a federally certified instructor, and actually handle, disassemble, reassemble, and shoot the gun with a certain level of proficiency. But after many people are issued the permit, they never see the range again.
Let me give you my take as a former law enforcement officer who has dealt with many citizens over the years, and has had to listen to their perceived “right” to possess and carry a firearm. Say we stop you for a traffic violation, and you either admit that you have a firearm in the car or we find it, concealed or not, meaning that you have a permit or don’t but are carrying it legally, which varies from state to state. We take it from you, and of course, you object and say, “I have a permit for that, and you can’t take it from me!” Yes, we can, Pal! Let me explain. What usually gets cops killed is a “citizen” with a firearm that we are not controlling. You see, we cops have very strict gun laws of our own; when there are guns around, we control them!
We are not going to let anyone have control of a firearm while we are in close proximity to you, because our very survival depends on it, regardless of your objection, threat to file a complaint or sue us-get in line! You may be a law-abiding citizen-we don’t know that. You may have a permit-we don’t know that until we check, but it doesn’t matter. You may state that you are a Christian Man, yes, I’ve heard that one several times, and it doesn’t matter. We will hold your gun and run our background checks on you, the gun, your dog, and your pet hamster, and when we’re done and you haven’t had your permit revoked, don’t have a warrant, and you are not a convicted felon or have not been convicted since you obtained the permit, you are free to go. We will then place your gun in the trunk of your car and wait for you to drive away. You can retrieve it after you’re home and far from us. Everyone is safe, mainly us, and that’s it. It’s an officer-safety issue. Don’t like it, too bad because this is how every police officer, given the right training, should and will handle your right to bear arms.
But now we have crossed another threshold in Modern America-Constitutional Carry. What does that mean exactly?
In the United States, the phrase “constitutional carry” also means “permit-less carry,” which means that someone can carry a concealed handgun without a license or permit. The term was derived from the Second Amendment, which gives citizens the right to bear arms. As of 2024, there are 29 states with Constitutional Carry. Aside from constitutional carry, states have concealed carry and open carry. In concealed carry states, a person can carry a legal weapon in their vehicle or on their person as long as it is hidden from sight. A permit is required in several states, and every state has laws about whether or not a permit will be issued to residents or non-residents. In open-carry states, a person can legally carry their firearm in a holster or attached to a sling (long gun) so that it is in the open and easily accessible.
In Florida, my home state, Open Carry has been implemented. Here is the opening highlight from our Attorney General James Uthmeier’s Guidance Memorandum to Florida’s Law Enforcement Agencies and Prosecuting Authorities, September 15, 202,5, Re: Florida’s Open Carry Laws following McDaniels v. State:
We write to provide guidance on an important development last week in Florida’s appellate courts affecting the right to bear arms. In McDaniel v. State, the First District Court of Appeal struck down Florida’s ban on open carry (Section 790.053, Florida Statutes), finding that “law-abiding, adult citizens” have a right to carry “firearms[s] openly in public” under the Second Amendment. Op.1. The court’s decision is attached… (You can find the rest of the memorandum online.)
The Florida Appellate Court has opened Pandora’s Box with this ruling. Courts can never be wrong, right? What is going to happen again, as in 1995 when the laws changed and there was a loophole for about two weeks, is that individuals will feel emboldened to carry a firearm, on their hip or slung on their shoulder, and when they are in public, other citizens will freak-the-f*@k-out and call the police. When we arrive and confront a person with a gun, prudence dictates that we draw down and order them to lay down the weapon. Some will say right off, “I don’t have to because it’s my right!” See where I’m going with this? So now Mr. Cowboy decides he’s going to disobey police commands and create one Hell of a mess. This ends one of two ways: Jesse James either puts down his weapon, or we light him up! He may very well be within the law, but we don’t know that. We don’t know who he is or what his intentions are. People call 911, and we have to respond and regard it as a threat.
Some might argue this, but they’re Monday Morning Quarterbacking it from the safety of their recliner. We are in harm’s way and everyone we meet, with or without a firearm, IS a potential threat, so we will treat him/her/they/them as such. Apologies, and you’re free to leave; you can come later. When open-carry came up several years ago, and now, most of us in law enforcement opposed it, including the Florida Sheriffs’ Association. We think this is a very bad idea, but the appellate court has ruled, and it’s now the law, and we have to live with it. I carry 100% of the time because of my training and experience, but I would never carry openly, and you wouldn’t know it until I pointed it at you. This will make some individuals feel like they’re back in the Wild West, and in a confrontation will be tempted to “skin that smoke wagon,” whether it’s against the police or not, and then we’ll have another preventable tragedy. Some humans cannot be left to their own devices, especially when it comes to firearms. I believe the court is wrong. We will have incidents that will make their way back into the court system and be litigated again, but for now, I can only worry about myself and those with me. Beware of the person you get into a beef with. It could be your last…
