John Buttrick writes from his Vermont Rocker in his Concord home: Minds Crossing. He can be reached at johndbuttrick@gmail.com.

I support the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution affirming that “the right of the people to keep and bear (18th century) Arms, shall not be infringed.” That is, the right to keep and bear antique 18th-century muskets, flintlock rifles and pistols, and swords.

All of the legal and political arguments over the decades to apply the Second Amendment to 21st-century armaments are flawed for a simple reason. It is anachronistic to include 2023 weapons among the known arms of 1791. Even the most basic technology of contemporary weapons could not have even been imagined in the 18th century, nor necessarily sanctioned as acceptable to be kept or carried by people.

Kevin Baez, Smithsonian learning lab, explains, “muskets were muzzle-loaded, which means that the powder and bullet were poured into the barrel. Rifles and pistols, on the other hand, were flint locked.” That means those guns were ignited by flint and steel. Muskets were slow and difficult to load, taking about 30 seconds before each shot.

In contrast, in my early teens I had access to a single shot 20-gauge shotgun and a 16-gauge double barrel shotgun. Both could be quickly reloaded with shotgun shells. In army basic training in 1962, I was trained on the M-1 rifle, a semi-automatic rifle that was the service rifle of the U.S. Army during World War II and the Korean War.

It held 8 rounds in a clip that could quickly be replaced. The M16 Assault Rifle (modified AR-15) is now the standard-issue shoulder weapon in the U.S. military, holding 20 to 30 rounds. Its first large scale deployment was during the Vietnam conflict. 18th century weapons cannot match the capacity and standards of any of these guns.

Therefore, any legal or political attempts to include modern weapons as if they were referenced in the Second Amendment becomes an anachronistic view of history. 18th century arms technology can include modern weaponry, only if time travel is possible. Thus, the possession of the AR-15, used in the recent Louisville mass shooting, cannot be a companion of the muskets and flintlocks in 1791. More than a dozen people were shot, five killed, in 3 to 5 minutes. Hardly possible with single shot muskets or flintlocks.

Therefore, the Second Amendment, ratified in 1791, cannot reasonably be applied to the assault and automatic weapons of 2023. The amendment has no authority to support keeping and bearing these contemporary guns. Also, this use of the Second Amendment is a distraction from evaluating the dangers of the weapons and reaching conclusions about how to keep people safe.

The Gun Violence Archive reports there have been at least 145 mass shootings in the United States this year. More than 200 people killed and many more injured. Each time there is another shooting there is a desperate request to elected officials to initiate efforts to end these shootings. Response is hesitant. For a few days, there is a call for more assault weapons control, background checks, and attention to the mental illness. And then, gun rights advocates resist and the courts rule – resulting in few, if any changes.

However, last year, President Biden did sign into the law the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, that includes a firearms section. This section makes “changes to federal firearms laws, including to expand background check requirements for persons who are under 21 years of age, to establish new criminal offenses for straw purchasing of firearms and trafficking in firearms, and to extend federal firearms-related restrictions to individuals convicted of domestic violence misdemeanors against dating partners.”

But there is still no action to regulate or ban the high-powered assault and automatic guns.

The right to bear these deadly arms takes away the right of U.S. citizens to be safe. Citizens’ rights are far more important and democratic than the anachronistic reading of the Second Amendment. Each day, citizens’ rights to be free from gun violence are violated with more gun deaths and people wounded. Hesitation to act is not an acceptable response. The time is now.

It has become essential to rise up in support of members of Congress who are willing to ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, restrict the use of guns with 21st century technology, and to repeal gun manufacturers’ immunity from liability. These are important steps in a free democratic society.

Let the Second Amendment remain in its place as an 18th century authoritative document standing for the rights of antique gun collectors. Let the 21st century document the wisdom for its time.

]]>