Why confiscation is unlikely

| April 18, 2013

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

Whether or not you learned it in History class or from a “Schoolhouse Rock” video, the preamble to the Constitution is familiar to almost any American citizen.

Inspired by the truckers she meets while traveling the country with her husband, owner-operator George, in addition to checking in on Facebook in Liberal, Kan., Wendy Parker writes the George & Wendy Show blog, appearing several times a week at OverdriveOnline.com/wendy.

Overdrive‘s Wendy Parker (pictured with her owner-operator husband, George) blogs at the George & Wendy Show, appearing several times weekly here.

When I was in school, there was a copy of the Constitution posted in every classroom, a replica of the original, written in script with curly, burnt edges. Beside it hung the Bill of Rights, and an American flag, which we stood up and pledged allegiance to every morning. For my entire public school career, I knew those documents were there, and I knew they protected me and people had died for the right to print, display and abide by them. But I never really read the whole thing, and I never understood the process of amending those documents. Until now.

There is much talk about our Second Amendment rights on television, the radio and especially the CB. I’ve heard everything from “the president is going to sign a bill today and the Army is coming after your guns tomorrow” to “Congress is declaring war on American citizens.” Granted, you can’t believe half of what you hear on the CB, and the other half is probably suspect as well — but there does seem to be a current of misinformation in it all about what process would actually have to take place to disarm the American public.

The Second Amendment was adopted on December 15, 1791. It was part of a nifty little thing called the Bill of Rights, a document our forefathers put together to ensure our basic rights and freedoms were not infringed upon. The Second Amendment is the only one which states a purpose, and is the shortest amendment in text.

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  text leaves way for much discussion about what a “well regulated militia” is. Also, when the Amendment was ratified, there wasn’t any such thing as an automatic assault weapon, so the type of arms this amendment protects has been the subject of many screaming sessions on Capitol Hill. There is a huge difference between a black powder rifle and an M-16.

Here is a very basic, bare bones answer to the question of what process is required to make a change in the Bill of Rights: It’s not easy to do.

Either the House of Representatives (435 voting members) or Senate (100 members) can call for an amendment with a two-thirds vote, or two-thirds of the state legislatures (50 total — 27 Republican controlled, 17 Democratic, 5 split and one nonpartisan) can call for a Constitutional Convention. There hasn’t been a Constitutional Convention since the first one, so it usually starts with a proposed amendment in Congress (535 voting members). The proposed amendment would have to be passed by three-fourths of states to become law. This law can still be defeated by the Supreme Court, if challenged and taken to task.

So it’s really not that basic, but it’s as close as you can get without going on for five pages and taking up 15 minutes of your time. Bottom line: it’s a convoluted process and no one is coming to get your guns tomorrow.

The U.S. has the best-armed civilian population in the world, with an estimated 270 million total guns. That’s an average of 89 firearms for every 100 residents. It seems highly unlikely there would ever be an argument strong enough to sway that many people toward voting themselves out of the right to bear arms. No one in their right mind is going after your guns in totality — what they’re going to do is restrict the terms surrounding the actual ownership. And that’s where the fun begins.

Politicians and lawmakers are insidious in the ways they’re going about gun control, because of the public outcry and volatile nature of the argument. The issue isn’t going to be taking the guns away, it’s going to be getting ammunition for them. I went to three gun stores today and could not purchase 9-mm rounds at any of them because they didn’t have any. None of the three had loose black powder for loading a press, and all of them told me they hadn’t had it on the shelves since Sandy Hook.

This isn’t the result of new laws. It’s because the minute anyone starts talking about restricting gun rights, firearm and ammunition sales skyrocket. People stockpile, because they’re unsure of the future of their rights. Demand goes through the roof. Nothing sells guns better than a politician coming out with anti-gun rhetoric — nothing fuels the market for munitions better than an announcement from the White House regarding gun law.

Again, no one will be banging on your door tomorrow, but there has been a steady chipping away at our basic rights under the guise of homeland security. It’s been going on for a long time. It’s time for a frank discussion about the difference between a well-armed citizen, a lunatic and a terrorist.

Responsible gun owners should be informed and vote accordingly, there are some very un-gun-friendly politics right now. If politicians want new gun laws, they need to make them clear and put them in front of the citizens for a vote, like the process says they must do to amend the Constitution.

They can’t take anything away from you that you don’t give them.

  • Pingback: Why confiscation is unlikely - Truck Drivers Careers | Truck Driving Jobs

  • http://www.facebook.com/danny.murdock.35 Danny Murdock

    You can still buy a musket without any paperwork.Going by unlimited rights to arms we should all be allowed to possess a nuclear warhead,bazooka, F-16 fighter jet,missiles,Apache helicopter or Howitzer cannon.Look around you and see how many of those people you would be comfortable with owning any of those weapons.

  • John West

    The right of the people to keep and bear arms is “infringed” every day by our government – comprised mostly of corrupt and useless folks who have no understanding of or regard for the Constitution or the Bill of Rights. We all need to be able to protect ourselves – and mostly from them.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Mark-Hayward/761089322 Mark Hayward

    I think Switzerland is much better armed and much better prepared for a foreign invasion. Otherwise a great article.

  • http://twitter.com/howddydutytime Mike Smith

    The 2nd has TWO parts. Don’t confuse them with petty discussion.

    Part 1, “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State,

    Part 2, “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

    We know what are forefathers were up against. They made the 2nd to ensure we have a way to protect ourselves from a government that is going against it’s citizens. Which is what are government has and is doing by supporting the Mexican Invasion, etc.

    These two parts are NOT unclear. End of story.

  • http://twitter.com/howddydutytime Mike Smith

    The gov having the weapons you have mentioned puts them in a far superior position. We don’t have the money to by these powerful weapons. The gov is corrupted, and now could use these weapons against us. This does not mean we should not think 200 million armed Americans couldn’t do anything to protect ourselves from the gov. If they break us down by eating away at the 2nd with there horse shit, we will be helpless eventually.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002056581879 Robert Taylor

    Well there are those on the left who believe that guns are the problem but they are not.
    Yesterday I placed my shotgun on the front porch, gave it six shells, and noticing it had no legs, placed it in a wheelchair to help it get around.

    While I as gone, the mailman delivered my mail, the boy picked up my yard, a girl down the street walked her dog. After 10 hours, I checked on the shotgun. It had not rolled outside and it had not killed anyone in spite of many opportunities that had been presented.

    Can you imagine how surprised I was, with all the hype about how dangerous guns are and how they kill people? Either the killing is by people misusing guns or I’m in possession of the laziest gun in the world. So now I’m off to check on my spoons, because I hear they make people fat.

    Donald K. Martin, Windsor locks

  • http://twitter.com/howddydutytime Mike Smith

    I believe that the DHS is buying up ammo as a way to try and disarm us by making our guns basically useless. This is also a demoralizing, and psychological attack. Think about how you feel when yo go to buy ammo and it’s not there, or limited, or two expensive. I have that somewhat helpless feeling. Don’t you?

    The following are great points.

    “The issue isn’t going to be taking the guns away, it’s going to be getting ammunitionfor them. I went to three gun stores today and could not purchase 9-mm rounds at any of them because they didn’t have any. None of the three had loose black powder for loading a press, and all of them told me they hadn’t had it on the shelves since Sandy Hook.”

  • Dr Duke

    Don’t forget executive orders. The law of the land is that illegal aliens should be deported. Now because of an executive order that law is not being enforced. The other threat is regulation. The BATF, EPA or some other acronym could come up with all sorts of restrictions making it nearly impossible to get and or use a gun.

    I get a kick out of people who claim on the internet that the 2nd Amendment only applies to muskets. Does the 1st Amendment only apply to the town crier? The internet did not exist when the bill of rights was signed so by that logic it is not covered..

  • http://twitter.com/howddydutytime Mike Smith


  • Jimmy the Greek

    I have no problem with anyone having any of them things if one can afford them , the public should be as well armed as the police or government ,

  • Doc

    Small point, very few guns use black powder for reloading rounds, it’s smokeless powder most often used unles your going for something like a Sharps or other early cartridge gun. But other than that, a great read.

  • Speed

    I agree-can’t remember the last time I could buy 9mm ammo. Feels like an eternity. The major ammo manufacturers have said they have huge contracts to fill w/the Fed. Gov.,but will make sure the Citizens can get the ammo they need. I wish they’d get on with it. I don’t even practice anymore because I can’t replace the ammo I use.

  • Wendy
  • Thomas Duncan

    I agree with a lot of this BUT I think of all the things That “they could never do” that has been done,unconstitutionally at that,and I am shocked.These,call them what you want,will not stop until these things are regulated to the point it is hopeless.Things are done by regulation that can not pass the requirements of our constitution.

  • Thomas Duncan

    I just looked around me and the people I am around are no threat to anyone no matter what weapon they would have.You might want to reconsider who you hang around with.

  • David S. McQueen

    The “rule of law” has been ignored by the Obama regime, so the US Constitution is not a deterrent for him. Regardless, gun control (sic) is merely one facet of the overall strategy which is to create a citizenry of weak, dependent, subservient and mallable people who are easily swayed by propaganda. They are to be ruled (not governed) by a small, elite cabal of rich leftists who will control the private sector. It’s a utopian form of society that historically has failled every time it’s been tried but the leftists still continue to dream the dream of statism.

  • steveintx

    Wendy, every law passed since and including, “check yer guns at the edge of town, cowboy”, has been an infringement of our rights. An assault weapon is anything from a “cap & ball” to a .50cal and beyond depending on it’s usage.

    I imagine you can find “assault weapon” in the Constitution right next to the word “musket”

  • David S. McQueen

    You use black powder? Why not smokeless powder?

  • hbtrux

    Whole different issue if Gov. can some how piss people off enough to rise up in civil unrest. once civil unrest happens the president can declare Marshal law.. and during Marshal law the Constitution is suspended. and then your stuck with King Obama and the NEW WORLD ORDER Aka U.N.

  • hbtrux

    Also if you ain’t been Paying Attention this current Gov. DOESN’T ABIDE BY THE CONSTITUTION! nor do they care what laws are on the books all they care about is CONTROL AND GOVERNMENT POWER… if they did care Obastard would of been Impeached by now.

  • martymarsh

    Mike, my son is a Marine and I promise you, they will have no one to operate them weapons, so where does that leave them? He also has his carry permit, so do you think he would help them in something that he don’t believe in. All service men and women have family, you don’t shoot your family because the government tells you to, as a matter of fact you will get a total opposite reaction.

  • martymarsh

    Let me give you the shorter version, because they can’t.

  • Kent

    Automatic assault weapons have been around for a long time. Automatic assault weapons were Not used in the recent mass shooting events. The weapons used were Semi auto. A semi automatic weapon that looks like a military issue m16 is just that. Just because it looks like the fully auto military version, it is not ! So I say, any weapon used for a assault, is then deemed a assault weapon. This makes the whole military assault weapons argument moot. Why ?, because when has anyone used a military assault weapon in these shootings that was fully automatic ?

  • boxarrow

    Wendy I love your writing. Very funny stuff. You might want to check out the link to a video that I came across recently. If it hasn’t been posted here already. Really go and see what this government can and will do when it comes to guns. This took place in the Good Ol US of A. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MLvZPcYDfKs if the link doesn’t work, search Youtube.com for “Never Again parts 1 and 2”.

  • Robert Benton

    Yeah,, let’s Sue an auto dealer because someone got hit by a driver that took too
    many pain killers.

  • Robert Benton

    If I only afford one those :)

  • Robert Benton


OverdriveOnline.com strives to maintain an open forum for reader opinions. Click here to read our comment policy.