"That rifle on the wall of the labourer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." - George Orwell 1941.British citizens have lost their rights to firearm ownership. They should have paid more attention to Mr. Orwell, although to be fair the Magna Carta was designed to protect the lessor nobles from the Monarch, unlike the U.S. Constitution which is
more concerned with the rights of all citizens.
There is a tendency for some of those that support a citizen's right to own a firearm to use the phrase "gun rights". Guns do not have rights in the United States, you as an individual have rights. Your right to own a firearm is stated in the 2nd Amendment.
There are some 2nd Amendment supporters who try to mollify the anti-gun ownership crowd by extolling the virtues of target shooting, this makes no difference to the gun control crowd. Let's be honest, a firearm is designed to kill or maim another human being. A firearm is designed to end a threat to your life, or your family's lives without having to swing a baseball bat like a Viking Berserker, or to emulate Zorro with that cutlery set you keep in the knife block on the kitchen counter.
There are some bishops that are calling gun ownership a social justice concern. They are correct, but not in the way they might think. I hope they reread the following passages of the Catechism.
Catechism of the Catholic Church
2263 The legitimate defense of persons and societies is not
an exception to the prohibition against the murder of the innocent that
constitutes intentional killing. "The act of self-defense can have a double
effect: the preservation of one's own life; and the killing of the aggressor....
the one is intended, the other is not."
2264 Love toward oneself remains a fundamental principle of
morality. Therefore it is legitimate to insist on respect for one's own right to
life. Someone who defends his life is not guilty of murder even if he is forced
to deal his aggressor a lethal blow:
If a man in self-defense uses
more than necessary violence, it will be unlawful: whereas if he repels force
with moderation, his defense will be lawful.... Nor is it necessary for
salvation that a man omit the act of moderate self-defense to avoid killing the
other man, since one is bound to take more care of one's own life than of
another's.
2265 Legitimate defense can be not only a right but a grave
duty for someone responsible for another's life. Preserving the common good
requires rendering the unjust aggressor unable to inflict harm. To this end,
those holding legitimate authority have the right to repel by armed force
aggressors against the civil community entrusted to their charge.
Finally we come back to Mao Zedong who provided the title for my scribbling, and understood what it meant for the state to be armed, and the individual citizen to be disarmed. Without the 2nd Amendment none of the other Amendments matter. Free human beings may own firearms, slaves and subjects do not.
