We're Losing The War Against Dumbf***ery, Chapter Two

No, the 2nd Amendment does NOT guarantee your right to own a nuclear weapon

Religious-right pseudo-historian David Barton is a Second Amendment absolutist, meaning that he believes there should be literally no limits on what sort of weapons private citizens can possess, including tanks and fighter jets.

Under Barton’s interpretation of the Second Amendment, the “right to bear arms” was designed to guarantee that citizens are adequately armed to fight off their own government if necessary, and therefore they have the right to obtain any and all weapons that the government possesses.

On Thursday’s episode of his “WallBuilders Live” radio program, Barton said that even applies to nuclear weapons.

“The greatest people-killer of all has been government,” Barton said. “Nothing has killed more people than government has killed. And so when you look at that, the Founding Fathers believed that the people should be able to have enough arms in place to be able to remind their government you don’t want to mess with us, you don’t want to come after us. Well, if all we’ve got is peashooters and they’ve got .50 caliber machine guns, that’s not the point of the [Second] Amendment.”

Based on what I’ve seen during the Trump Era (2015-present), it seems self-evident that what George Clooney described as the war against dumbf***ery isn’t going well. So much of America is ruled by stupid people doing stupid things for stupid reasons these days. It’s easy to feel distressed over the lack of brainpower and rational thought that goes into the analysis and development of public policy. Too often, it’s not about what’s best for the country. It’s about “owning the libs.”

David Barton may fancy himself a historian, but the reality is that he’s a significant contributor to today’s atmosphere of American dumf***ery. The tricky part is to know where to begin, but for the sake of argument, let’s start with “[t]he greatest people-killer of all has been government.” This indefensible canard has been part of Right-wing legend since the 2nd Amendment was written (poorly).

Not only does Barton offer no proof or examples to back up such an incendiary charge, he assumes that his audience will accept it as an article of faith. The problem with his assertion is that it simply isn’t factual. The American government isn’t a “people-killer,” much less the “greatest of all.” This argument falls apart when it’s used to defend the “need” for the 2nd Amendment.

Right-wing orthodoxy has consistently held that the 2nd Amendment is vital to allow citizens to protect themselves against a tyrannical government. The absurdity of this argument notwithstanding, no individual or collection of individuals will defeat the most powerful and professional military in the world.

The 2nd Amendment is, to understate what should be blindingly evident, the most willfully misinterpreted and misrepresented 27 words in the English language:

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.

The problem is that the first 13 words: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State” are meaningless independent of the final 14 words: “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” The right of the people to keep and bear arms is directly related to the need for a well-regulated militia, which hasn’t been necessary since the creation of the National Guard and Reserves.

The 2nd Amendment is the “poison pill” of the American experiment- obsolete and no longer applicable in today’s world. Unfortunately, right-wingers and Proudly Closed-minded Gun Control Foes use the text of the 2nd Amendment to justify their desire to value firepower over human life. The National Rifle Association (NRA) has purchased so much of Congress that they’ve guaranteed themselves a compliant legislative body. The lives of innocent civilians has become a secondary concern to a citizen’s right to bear arms.

None of that means the 2nd Amendment guarantees an American the right to own a nuclear weapon. It’s impossible to overstate the absurdity of that argument, yet Barton and the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia hold it to be true. Barton’s take on the question is astonishingly naive from someone who fancies himself an intellectual:

“I don’t want to see my neighbor stockpile nuclear bombs—I don’t want to see it—but I don’t care if he has one because he should have the same rights [as the government],” Barton added. “But you say, ‘Well, I don’t think private citizens should have nuclear weapons.’ But if you’ve been trained with responsibility and morality and the concept of when and where you use them—the Founding Fathers were trained extensively and the concept of defensive warfare: You don’t start anything, [but] if somebody else starts it, you can take it on, but you don’t start it. I don’t care if my neighbor has a nuclear weapon as long as he has that defensive concept that he will never use that unless it’s being used against him.”

During my time as an Army Reserve officer, we conducted every training exercise understanding that if you have a weapon in your hand, you’d best be prepared to use it. You don’t own a firearm- or a nuclear weapon- without the expectation that you’ll at some time have to use it. “Don’t start it” isn’t a reasonable or sustainable argument. Merely possessing a weapon exponentially increases the likelihood of “starting something.”

Nowhere in the 2nd Amendment is there literal or implied permission for a citizen to own or carry whatever type or degree of firepower they desire. Moreover, there’s no right to bear arms APART from the need for a well-regulated militia, which the establishment of a standing military force has rendered moot. Therefore, we should consider the 2nd Amendment null and void, and Congress should replace it with something applicable and meaningful today.

And please, for the sake of all that’s good, can we not let David Barton decide what the 2nd Amendment means? No one should be allowed to pull an argument out of their backside, which is precisely what Barton has done in this case.

Because I don’t want my neighbor to own or even have access to a nuclear weapon; that idea should terrify any reasonable and rational person.

And so the war against dumbf***ery continues to go poorly….

Thank you for taking the time to read this. If you enjoyed it, I hope you’ll take a few seconds and join the party via a paid subscription. While you’re at it, why not forward this to a few like-minded friends who might also enjoy it!! You can also donate via Venmo (@Jack-Cluth).