Brother Cuddy Drops In: 'An American Devolution'

It is fortuitous, perhaps, that good friend Jude Cuddy has penned another of his insightful essays at the same moment the nation is watching the U.S. Supreme Court, to see if it decides to review the Parker/Heller/District of Columbia appeal. The media's confusion (and the anti's outright distortions) over the meaning of the 1930s Miller decision, and the descriptions from both sides of the debate on what the High Court's actions this week might mean, all make for high drama in our nation's capital. Brother Cuddy sees a larger issue facing America, and suggests that the Parker case represents a turning point . . . a fork in the road, of sorts, for this nation. We can forge ahead on a path blazed by the Framers, or we can turn down a road toward "An American Devolution."

"An American Devolution -- My View From Behind The Berm

"A cursory examination of the Bill of Rights reveals the limits insisted upon by our Fathers that would effectively keep the ever encroaching powers of a central government in check. They did not limit themselves by technology, knowing full well that the document was penned to protect the populace by focusing on the character of man, not the method of delivery.

"Take the First Amendment, which so many of our fellow citizens like to hide behind when attacking the Second Amendment. Yes, it is okay to infringe upon those that own and carry a firearm. However, just dare to tell someone what they can write or speak and they really get frosted. Of course those that adhere to a policy of personal responsibility – gun owners included - would not suggest this, being blatantly unconstitutional. At least some engaged in the debate show respect for the law. The First Amendment is about the free exchange of the written and spoken word. When written, the standard delivery method was the soap box. And the printing press. The "low–tech" kind that took time, skill and commitment to master. Technology has brought us the internet, e-mail and satellite transmissions that certainly speed things up, but do not detract one bit from the importance of this sacred underpinning of a free and open society.

"Let us then consider the Second Amendment. Same thing applies. The right to defend one’s self. To keep government honest and provide a safety valve for the citizens to alter or abolish a government that becomes too powerful. In colonial America, the prevalent technology was the muzzle loading pistol or rifle, black powder and flint to make it all function. This arm also took skill, patience and a certain knowledge that it may not always work.

"The current political climate, however, seems to embrace advances in communications, but views the Second Amendment and its’ modern progeny as rather inconvenient. It appears that instead of focusing on crime by punishing the criminal, there is an irrational bent for focusing on the instrument. That logic, then, assigns blame to the keyboard for making slanderous accusations. The language contained in the Second Amendment is quite clear. It was put there for ever more obvious reasons, as what the Founders feared is taking place before our very eyes. Those that claim to want to govern well still want to govern. It is also clear that the modern politician has lost sight of the mission, which is to limit their actions to those tasks enumerated in the Constitution. Today, regulations and rules abound, stifling our prosperity and our future. The collective American "gut feeling" tells us as much.

"Sensational crimes involving firearms are always followed by public officials demanding that those that have done nothing wrong willingly surrender theirs. A crime is a crime, whether a gun is misused, or perhaps a knife or a rock. Does it matter to the victim? Perhaps the efforts toward confiscating the firearms of the true citizens of this Republic should be channeled into actually prosecuting the few who do commit acts against others. Is not the community better served by taking the criminal off the street than proposing yet another ineffectual gun control law?

"Benjamin Franklin opined that the 'true deterrent to crime is not the severity of the punishment, but the certainty of punishment.' There was crime in early America, as there has been throughout recorded history. Libel is just as damaging now via e-mail as it was with a handbill. The flintlock musket and a modern self loading pistol no are less deadly when misused. The real culprit is the man who wields the instrument, as our Fathers understood. The focus must remain on the act of man harming his fellow man, not on the means at hand.

"Technology may change, but human nature does not. Proposing increasingly draconian measures merely emboldens those already outside the law - and at the stroke of a pen often makes felons of us all.

"That is the real crime."