elfegobaca2@earthlink.net

Submitted by the Second Amendment Police Department

The Democratic candidate for governor of New Jersey recently said that gun ownership is a bad idea.

For more than twenty years now I have owned a handgun. Initially, I did so because I was a police officer--my pistol was a tool of the trade.

On duty, the weight of the service revolver against my hip was a reminder of the dangers of my occupation. Off duty, the bulk of the weapon concealed in the waistband of my trousers reminded me of the dangers of modern society. In all the years of being around handguns I still, to this day, do not feel comfortable with them. I guess knowing, first hand, the havoc and carnage firearms can create gives me an appreciation the average person does not have. Knowing the types of people who illegally use firearms makes that appreciation much more meaningful.

I do not like owning or carrying a handgun. They are dangerous, unsightly, and uncomfortable. I would be perfectly content not to carry one. I fervently hope that it will never be used. However, I feel it necessary.

I enthusiastically endorse the impassioned efforts of those who want to keep firearms from those who are of a criminal nature or who are emotionally unstable. They have a noble goal. They want to save lives.

Handguns save lives too.

According to experts, thousands of lives are saved each year by the use of handguns.

It would be encouraging if the gun control fanatics were as zealous in their opposition to releasing habitual criminals from prison. If they were as ardent in implementing programs that actually prevent crime rather than social experiments that offer the phantasm of total criminal rehabilitation.

It would also be encouraging if Democrats ceased exploiting this serious issue for political gain. They use gun control as a wedge issue. Their expectation is that demonizing gun owners and the NRA will cut funding and political support for Republicans. (I am a registered Independent.)

Gun control should not be a politicized. Too many lives are at stake.

Those obsessed with gun control offer many fallacies. One is that access to guns cause crime. If that were so then gun clubs would be the most dangerous places on the planet. Does anyone have data regarding homicides at gun clubs or pistol ranges? It is nearly nonexistent.

Another fallacy is that the Second Amendment is only to be used by governmentally organized groups such as the National Guard. This is not only vacuous; it is dangerous. The logic totally perverts the meaning of the Bill of Rights. That anyone can believe this is incredible.

The Bill of Rights exists to protect the people from the government--not the government from the people. The exercise of those rights need not be sanctioned by the government. What would they say if one applied their logic to the First Amendment? It would mean that only the media organized and sanctioned by the government would be allowed.

The other fallacy is that the Second Amendment refers only to the National Guard. This patently absurd. The Bill of Rights is a guideline for the establishment of governmental organizations. The Bill of Rights protects individuals. Is the Fourth Amendment only to protect against searches of organizations? Of course not, so why does the Second Amendment only apply to groups?

They should read about the Bill of Rights and its origins. They would learn that the Second Amendment has its roots in Pennsylvania's proposal to have citizens keep arms for defense of themselves and their state--or that Samuel Adams felt that the Constitution should not be construed as keeping citizens from owning guns. The word militia only means that the army is composed of citizen-soldiers.

Gun control advocates have some legitimate concerns. However, if they believe that abolition of private gun ownership will eliminate homicides by shooting they are wrong. Guns are inanimate objects. They are no more responsible for homicides than Picasso's brushes were responsible for his paintings or Goodman's clarinet was for his music. Guns are tools. They make homicide easier--that is irrefutable. Nevertheless, they make protection easier as well--that too is irrefutable. The Founding Fathers knew this.

Gun control advocates seem to believe that they are omniscient--when in fact it is quite the opposite. They exhibit a lack of understanding of the purposes of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

They can never be credible because of this, which is why they resort to demonizing gun owners.

Michael P. Tremoglie is a former Philadelphia police officer now a freelance writer working on his first novel. He writes for Front Page Magazine www.frontpagemag.com.