The quote used is this:
"A free people ought not only be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government."
First of all, it's not an accurate quote. Mt. Vernon researchers say so. But we'll get to that later. Let's look at the words you invoked as a supposed counter-argument to people's cries and demands for something to be done in the wake of mass shootings occurring in this country.
The quote says we should be armed AND DISCIPLINED. Please explain to me how entering a school and shooting 20 6-7 year olds demonstrates discipline. And just so we are utterly clear in our understanding of each other and this doesn't become a debate about semantics, let's use Merriam-Webster's definition of the word to guide us. (That's right, I'm invoking a poor writing tool, because this discussion has spiraled that far.)
discipline
: control that is gained by requiring that rules or orders be obeyed and punishing bad behavior: a way of behaving that shows a willingness to obey rules or orders: behavior that is judged by how well it follows a set of rules or orders
Did you catch the first word of the definition? "Control". Control is the thing we're missing most when it comes to guns in this country. No one is trying to take away your right to own a gun. Keep it. Keep your rifles and your handguns if you want. Go hunting if that's something you enjoy. But why do you need to own a military-grade weapon? What war are you fighting? I'm trying to protect innocent people's right to life, including yours.
This is the part where you say, "But the quote also says we should have sufficient arms and ammunition". You're right, it does say that. But it says you should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from abusers. So remind me again, how are college students infringing on your independence? How are movie-goers stepping on your freedom?
They're not. And you don't have any argument that can suggest otherwise. If you want to invoke that quote to support your right to shoot someone, that someone better be proactively attacking or repressing you or be a member of the government. That's what your quote says. That's why the founding fathers wrote the second amendment--to protect the people from a tyrannous government, not to give people a free pass. So if your real problem is with the senators, then take the fight to them. People attending school or the movies or a grocery store have nothing to do with your issue.
In my junior year of college I received Active Shooter and Crisis Training as part of my education. Do you realize how ridiculous that is? As a stage manager and as a teacher, it is my job to protect my coworkers, audiences, and students from armed gunmen. Every time I walk into a new place of work, I look for emergency exits and places to hide. I review my training so that when I'm involved in a shooting, I'll know what to do. ARE YOU KIDDING ME? Part of my training to become a history teacher involved learning how to strategically place my students so that a shooter would be less likely to hit all of them.
Now that I've broken down that "quote" let's talk about what George Washington actually said.
Here's the actual quote from which the above is likely derived:
"A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined; to which end a uniform and well-digested plan is requisite; and their safety and interest require that they should promote such manufactories as tend to render them independent of others for essential, particularly military, supplies."The beginning of the quote is the same, but Washington goes on to say a plan needs to be in place in order to have the people armed and disciplined. Maybe a plan such as screenings and required trainings. Perhaps some mild restrictions on the types of weapons that can be purchased. (What's next, torpedoes? Bazookas?) The rest of the quote says that people should promote institutions that will not require them to rely on others for supplies. Within the historical context of this quote, Washington is probably talking about making sure the government is not the sole supplier of military goods so that if the people need to rise up in revolution, they will have the means to do so.
All of this has been to say a few things:
1. Check your sources.
2. This quote does support the 2nd Amendment.
3. The 2nd Amendment (or the rest of the Constitution for that matter) does not support the factors at play which are allowing more mass shootings than days in a year to take place in the supposedly free-est country on the planet.
4. Crying, "Yes, but..." in the wake of fear, loss, and grief is heinous and irresponsible. Someone lost their son, sister, friend, life partner. And they are processing. And some of us are trying our damnedest to carry on and put light into this world in spite of the darkness. So please, before you post another inaccurate, flippant meme or soundbite or what have you, think about the principles and freedoms you claim to hold so dear. And think about if your actions actually support those principles or not.
