Among It’s Other Debilitating Rulings, the Supreme Court Has Introduced America to Endless “Unspeakable Acts of Violence.” The Court Has Blood on It’s Hands.

The BBC headline asks, “Monterey Park shooting: Who were the victims?”

In every American shooting that comes on a weekly or three-day cycle, be it a school, drive-by, police, mall or domestic, the victims are not anonymous and we needn’t ask who they were? They were us. We, the citizens of this great country, are the victims and the Supreme Court has made us so.

The Court chose to read the 2^nd Amendment like the idiots they are and with no historic sensibility

It reads, “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.” Okay, I got that.

The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed, because a well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State. That’s what’s known as a causal clause and the two cannot be separated. You do not get one without the other. The 2^nd Amendment does not guarantee only a ‘well regulated militia,’ nor does it guarantee only ‘the right of the people to keep and bear arms.’ It guarantees the combination.

The Supreme Court doesn’t give a shit about that, at least not its right-wing majority

And so we have a continuum of random idiots, including the mentally unstable and those who could use a bit of anger management, killing children in schools, fellow employees in businesses and drivers on roads with whom they disagree about lane usage. And so, we are destined to watch on the news, from those who endlessly mop up the blood, the same-old same-old “unspeakable acts of violence” and how “our hearts and minds are with the victims.”

I’m sorry to have to make the point, but hearts and minds aren’t doing anything to stop the carnage.

Neither are prison sentences. Prison is meant to be a deterrent to crime but, for far too many, indiscriminate killing is a short-term solution to long-term mental-health issues.

James Madison wasn’t concerned about that, it was not an issue of his times

In 1791 Madison introduced the Second Amendment to placate various fears regarding America’s military, the balance of power between federal and state governments, and the use of standing armies. We Americans, newly freed from the armies of the English Crown, were understandably suspect of standing armies. To a great extent, the English troops marching upon us behind drums and bugles, were defeated by colonial squirrel-hunters shooting from behind trees. There are certain other peculiarities about the state of the America of 1791 that have relevance:

Firstly, the weapon of that time (whether it be rifle or pistol) was muzzle-loaded. To the uninitiated, that means that, after a single shot was fired, the shooter was required to upend the weapon, pour a measure of powder down the barrel, insert a paper wad, insert a lead ball, then another wad, tamp the whole kit and caboodle down with a steel rod and, finally, place a cap on the firing mechanism, cock the hammer and aim.

It took me twenty seconds simply to read that instruction.

You can see the difficulty there, what with an opponent bearing down upon you, which was the reason muzzle-loaders had bayonets and most pistol aficionados carried two, along with a derringer up the sleeve. Madison and his ilk had no idea that modern off-the-shelf weaponry might someday fire 150 rounds in 15 seconds.

A second peculiarity was that 1791 America had a population of 2 ½ million people, most of whom knew most everyone within five or ten miles and had a business or social acquaintance as well. Today, we are 136 times more populous and 136 times less acquainted. Finally, add to that my personal prejudice that, as we have become a more civilized species, mankind has become less civil—in almost direct proportion.

The Supreme Court paid no attention to that either

God damn it, they should pay attention, it’s relevant.

We have been blessed through our Constitution with the finest example of a road map to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. But the world today is not the world it was when those cherished words were drafted. It is our business to hold that precious document to our heart and keep it relevant. It’s not enough—not by a long shot—to rage against unspeakable acts of violence and bow our heads, murmuring time after time after time that our hearts and minds are with the victims.

My heart and mind, this moment, is charging the Supreme Court with a crippling dereliction of its duties

Gun controls, abortion and voting rights are all falling under the hammer of a modern court that has entirely lost contact with its constituency. Yes, although it is not elected, the Supreme Court has a double constituency—the Constitution of the United States and the life, liberty and pursuit of happiness of its people, as promised by America’s Declaration of Independence.

Some 71% of Americans—including about half of Republican voters—say they want stricter gun control laws. Three out of five Americans believe abortion should be legal in all or most cases. 57% of Americans view voting as “a fundamental right for every adult U.S. citizen and should not be restricted in any way.”

Chief Justice John Roberts is concerned that the Court is losing its reputation for fairness and separation from political influence

As well he should be.