What do you think?
Rate this book
Repeal the Second Amendment: The Case for a Safer America
This program includes an introduction read by the author.
A radical case for the repeal of the 2nd Amendment as the only way to control gun violence in America.
There's an average of one mass shooting per day in the United States. Given the ineffectiveness of the gun control lobby, it's time for a strategy with spine. In Repeal the Second Amendment, Allan J. Lichtman has written the first book that uses history, legal theory and up-to-the-minute data to make a compelling case for the amendment’s repeal in order to create a clear road to sensible gun control in the US. Repeal the Second Amendment explores both the true history and current interpretation of the Second Amendment to expose the NRA’s blatant historical manipulations and irresponsible fake news releases. Lichtman looks at the history of firearms and gun regulations from colonial times to the present to explain how a historically forgotten sentence in the Constitution has become a flash point of recent politics that benefits only the gun industry, their lobbyists, and the politicians on their payroll. He probes court decisions and the effective lobbying and public relations strategies of the gun lobby as well as the ineffectiveness of the gun control movement for lessons in doing better.
What emerges is a clear and cogent plan - repeal and replace the Second Amendment without taking guns away from anyone who has them now - to make the US a safer place. It's time to Repeal the Second Amendment, and Allan Lichtman is the man to bring this radical plan to America.
A radical case for the repeal of the 2nd Amendment as the only way to control gun violence in America.
There's an average of one mass shooting per day in the United States. Given the ineffectiveness of the gun control lobby, it's time for a strategy with spine. In Repeal the Second Amendment, Allan J. Lichtman has written the first book that uses history, legal theory and up-to-the-minute data to make a compelling case for the amendment’s repeal in order to create a clear road to sensible gun control in the US. Repeal the Second Amendment explores both the true history and current interpretation of the Second Amendment to expose the NRA’s blatant historical manipulations and irresponsible fake news releases. Lichtman looks at the history of firearms and gun regulations from colonial times to the present to explain how a historically forgotten sentence in the Constitution has become a flash point of recent politics that benefits only the gun industry, their lobbyists, and the politicians on their payroll. He probes court decisions and the effective lobbying and public relations strategies of the gun lobby as well as the ineffectiveness of the gun control movement for lessons in doing better.
What emerges is a clear and cogent plan - repeal and replace the Second Amendment without taking guns away from anyone who has them now - to make the US a safer place. It's time to Repeal the Second Amendment, and Allan Lichtman is the man to bring this radical plan to America.
Audible Audio
Published January 28, 2020
23 people are currently reading
222 people want to read
About the author
Allan J. Lichtman
18 books108 followersAllan J. Lichtman is Distinguished Professor of History at The American University in Washington, D.C. and the author of many acclaimed books on U.S. political history, including White Protestant Nation: The Rise of the American Conservative Movement (finalist, 2008 National Book Critics Circle Award in Non-fiction), FDR and the Jews (with Richard Breitman), and The Case for Impeachment.
Professor Lichtman devised a model (“Keys to the White House”) with Vladimir Keilis-Borok to predict the outcome of US presidential elections; said model has been correct since 1984. He is regularly sought out by the media for his authoritative views on voting and elections.
Professor Lichtman devised a model (“Keys to the White House”) with Vladimir Keilis-Borok to predict the outcome of US presidential elections; said model has been correct since 1984. He is regularly sought out by the media for his authoritative views on voting and elections.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 18 of 18 reviews
October 26, 2023
In Mr. Lichtman’s non-fiction Repeal the Second Amendment: The Case for A Safer America, he digs deeply into the history of the U.S.A. to detail what was happening then, providing perspective and understanding as to what prompted the writing of this amendment. Snippets from pertinent discussions and disagreements around drafting the document were enlightening. An original draft used “country” in “…being necessary to the security of a free _____”; but “country” was replaced with “state”. The reason isn’t surprising, but is remarkably disappointing.
The amount of intricate research that went into this book was astounding. I certainly did not expect a review of historical documents for the use of the phrase “to bear arms” in order to determine if it referred to militia or individuals. Or for sentences to essentially be conjugated to show that if the amendment addressed the individual, the explanation clause would be redundant.
Being born and raised in WV, with my paternal parental unit competing in shooting matches every Sunday, I’ve heard a lot about “The Second”. One tiny detail my father and his fellow firearm fanatics omit though is that the government conducted a census. There was a government-maintained list of every single gun-owner, and each and every gun he owned. The same men I’ve heard vehemently insist on their “right” to bear arms are the first people to bristle at the suggestion of anyone else on the planet knowing which and how many firearms are currently in his possession.
The gun-owners of which I speak are also almost-angrily, proud members of the NRA. I guess by ignoring the fact that the National Rifle Association originally felt differently about the 2nd amendment. It wasn’t until late 20th century that the NRA reversed their own findings (without explanation or even acknowledgement). Maybe they are not bothered by the attempt to incorporate Santa Claus into gun ads. Or the NRA approaching the Vatican to name a “Patron Saint of Handgunners”.
To me, these pages were packed with historical facts. Some I knew, some I suspected, and several became blatant when the bigger picture emerged. My understanding of both historic and present-day policies, rules and regulations has been enriched. Because of the plethora of interesting information that I’ve not found elsewhere, I introduced and donated this book to “my” high-school seniors and I am looking forward to hearing their thoughts.
This review was written by jv poore for Buried Under Books, with huge thanks to St. Martin’s Publishing Group for the Advance Review Copy which was donated to my favorite high-school classroom library.
The amount of intricate research that went into this book was astounding. I certainly did not expect a review of historical documents for the use of the phrase “to bear arms” in order to determine if it referred to militia or individuals. Or for sentences to essentially be conjugated to show that if the amendment addressed the individual, the explanation clause would be redundant.
Being born and raised in WV, with my paternal parental unit competing in shooting matches every Sunday, I’ve heard a lot about “The Second”. One tiny detail my father and his fellow firearm fanatics omit though is that the government conducted a census. There was a government-maintained list of every single gun-owner, and each and every gun he owned. The same men I’ve heard vehemently insist on their “right” to bear arms are the first people to bristle at the suggestion of anyone else on the planet knowing which and how many firearms are currently in his possession.
The gun-owners of which I speak are also almost-angrily, proud members of the NRA. I guess by ignoring the fact that the National Rifle Association originally felt differently about the 2nd amendment. It wasn’t until late 20th century that the NRA reversed their own findings (without explanation or even acknowledgement). Maybe they are not bothered by the attempt to incorporate Santa Claus into gun ads. Or the NRA approaching the Vatican to name a “Patron Saint of Handgunners”.
To me, these pages were packed with historical facts. Some I knew, some I suspected, and several became blatant when the bigger picture emerged. My understanding of both historic and present-day policies, rules and regulations has been enriched. Because of the plethora of interesting information that I’ve not found elsewhere, I introduced and donated this book to “my” high-school seniors and I am looking forward to hearing their thoughts.
This review was written by jv poore for Buried Under Books, with huge thanks to St. Martin’s Publishing Group for the Advance Review Copy which was donated to my favorite high-school classroom library.
September 25, 2020
I have decided to embark on a mission to read a number of books on subjects that will be of great importance to the upcoming 2020 US Presidential Election. Many of these will focus on actors intricately involved in the process, in hopes that I can understand them better and, perhaps, educate others with the power to cast a ballot. I am, as always, open to serious recommendations from anyone who has a book I might like to include in the process.
This is Book #10 (re-read) in my 2020 US Election Preparation Challenge.
First and foremost, a large thank you to NetGalley, Allan J. Lichtman and St. Martin’s Press for providing me with a copy of this publication, which allows me to provide you with an unbiased review.
As I sit north of the 45th Parallel, I look down and notice that there is an issue with gun violence in the United States. No matter where one gets their news, it is plastered all over the place and has been for decades. Guns killing innocent people for no reason. Yet, as the blood flows and creates rivers of red across floors and asphalt, politicians have done little but ask for prayers directed to the families of victims, while gun manufacturers and the National Rifle Association (NRA) spouts that it is people killing people, not guns. Other countries have been able to notice the gun violence and legislate strong measures against it—take, for example, New Zealand in 2019–but America chooses to do nothing, citing something called the Second Amendment to the US Constitution. Known as the ‘right to bear arms’, this has been the battle cry of the NRA and the hardcore right in America, but there’s something that’s missing here; something that Allan J. Lichtman professes throughout this book and I have said all along. It was never an individual right in that amendment, nor should it be. But, that’s the controversy behind Lichtman’s desire to see the Second Amendment repealed a new measures put in place.
The premise of the book is quite simple, people do not understand the amendment and spew inane falsehoods spoon-fed to them. Lichtman opens the book with a chilling discussion of some recent episodes of gun violence and how everyone was quick to point blame at a deranged killer, rather that discuss the issue of gun availability. From there, he takes the reader back to look at how guns were introduced into the region, brought from Europe, and how the firearm found a home in the Thirteen Colonies. After the play towards independence, the political figures sought to enshrine when and how guns should be made available, presenting the Second Amendment to the US Constitution. Lichtman discusses how the constitutional conventions and speeches by the Founding Fathers shaped the intention of this amendment, laid out as being the right of the collective to bear arms in the form of a militia, particularly at a time when invasion was still possible. Moving forward, Lichtman explores how guns were of little issue in America for decades after that. Politicians began seeking to regulate guns in the early 20th century, which led to some questions about how to define the Second Amendment in contrast to this. The early NRA had no issue with the collective idea of gun ownership for the greater good, fixated on its role of promoting gun ownership for sport and education. However, with the rise of assassinations in the 1960s, there was a greater push to legislate gun control, keeping firearms out of the hands of just anyone. This was met with a newly politicized and fiery NRA, who turned their views towards the individual right to possess firearms. With massive amounts of money used to influence politicians, any meaningful change seemed paralyzed. Lichtman discusses these issues at length, culminating in challenges wth legislation violating the Second Amendment in the courts, some reaching the Supreme Court of the United States. Shockingly, when things reached that point, one of the Court’s great intellectuals and originalist thinkers, Antonio Scalia, completely forgot his long-held views of accepting laws through original meaning of the Founding Fathers. Instead, Scalia sided with this view of individual rights and the ongoing accessibility of people to possess firearms, in the pocket of the NRA.
As Lichtman scans the horizon to see where things have come in America, seeing an NRA bound and determined to use the Second Amendment’s bastardized interpretation to fill their coffers and hand guns over to anyone and everyone, the need for change seems dire. Citing former Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, John Paul Stevens, Lichtman explores how Congress might go about dismantling this thorn and repeal the Second Amendment. It will not be pretty or easy (with threats of money and slander by the NRA), but will rid the country of a horribly misconstrued constitutional crutch that has helped fuel the bloodshed. Paralleling the repeal with that of Prohibition in the 20th century, Lichtman shows how it would work and which actors would need to stand tall. He ends with a post-repeal America and the need to tighten or create laws to keep America from falling into the hands of the NRA or their apparent abyss of money. Whether it will work is another question, but it is always nice to speculate.
When I was asked to read this book by the publisher, I could not wait to sink my teeth into it. These were the arguments I had long made in my own discussions of the Second Amendment and I found myself agreeing with a lot of what Lichtman had to say. The tome is full of wonderful facts embedded into an easy to comprehend narrative. While there are aspects that have academic explorations, Lichtman keeps the arguments simple enough that anyone could understand. He does not hide his bias, though I cannot see how one could remain entirely neutral on this topic, offering up some fiery criticisms of those who stand idly by and spout vapid sentiments when people—children especially—are dying in senseless ways. While the chapters are not massive, the information encapsulated within them makes for an impactful read and kept me nodding throughout. I was especially interested in Lichtman’s proposal to repeal the Second Amendment, knowing how difficult a process it is (as any constitutional change should be) and where the pitfalls lie with enemies waiting. This is a sobering read for anyone looking to stir up a little controversy at the dinner table or amongst those with strong opinions. If only a discussion could be had where both sides agree on the wording of the topic at hand, leaving well-rounded and firmly grounded ideas to sway opinions.
Kudos, Mr. Lichtman, for not shying away from the controversy. This will take longer than November 3, 2020 to make America great again, but if we can oust the clown, surely this circus can be quelled.
Love/hate the review? An ever-growing collection of others appears at:
http://pecheyponderings.wordpress.com/
A Book for All Seasons, a different sort of Book Challenge: https://www.goodreads.com/group/show/...
This is Book #10 (re-read) in my 2020 US Election Preparation Challenge.
First and foremost, a large thank you to NetGalley, Allan J. Lichtman and St. Martin’s Press for providing me with a copy of this publication, which allows me to provide you with an unbiased review.
As I sit north of the 45th Parallel, I look down and notice that there is an issue with gun violence in the United States. No matter where one gets their news, it is plastered all over the place and has been for decades. Guns killing innocent people for no reason. Yet, as the blood flows and creates rivers of red across floors and asphalt, politicians have done little but ask for prayers directed to the families of victims, while gun manufacturers and the National Rifle Association (NRA) spouts that it is people killing people, not guns. Other countries have been able to notice the gun violence and legislate strong measures against it—take, for example, New Zealand in 2019–but America chooses to do nothing, citing something called the Second Amendment to the US Constitution. Known as the ‘right to bear arms’, this has been the battle cry of the NRA and the hardcore right in America, but there’s something that’s missing here; something that Allan J. Lichtman professes throughout this book and I have said all along. It was never an individual right in that amendment, nor should it be. But, that’s the controversy behind Lichtman’s desire to see the Second Amendment repealed a new measures put in place.
The premise of the book is quite simple, people do not understand the amendment and spew inane falsehoods spoon-fed to them. Lichtman opens the book with a chilling discussion of some recent episodes of gun violence and how everyone was quick to point blame at a deranged killer, rather that discuss the issue of gun availability. From there, he takes the reader back to look at how guns were introduced into the region, brought from Europe, and how the firearm found a home in the Thirteen Colonies. After the play towards independence, the political figures sought to enshrine when and how guns should be made available, presenting the Second Amendment to the US Constitution. Lichtman discusses how the constitutional conventions and speeches by the Founding Fathers shaped the intention of this amendment, laid out as being the right of the collective to bear arms in the form of a militia, particularly at a time when invasion was still possible. Moving forward, Lichtman explores how guns were of little issue in America for decades after that. Politicians began seeking to regulate guns in the early 20th century, which led to some questions about how to define the Second Amendment in contrast to this. The early NRA had no issue with the collective idea of gun ownership for the greater good, fixated on its role of promoting gun ownership for sport and education. However, with the rise of assassinations in the 1960s, there was a greater push to legislate gun control, keeping firearms out of the hands of just anyone. This was met with a newly politicized and fiery NRA, who turned their views towards the individual right to possess firearms. With massive amounts of money used to influence politicians, any meaningful change seemed paralyzed. Lichtman discusses these issues at length, culminating in challenges wth legislation violating the Second Amendment in the courts, some reaching the Supreme Court of the United States. Shockingly, when things reached that point, one of the Court’s great intellectuals and originalist thinkers, Antonio Scalia, completely forgot his long-held views of accepting laws through original meaning of the Founding Fathers. Instead, Scalia sided with this view of individual rights and the ongoing accessibility of people to possess firearms, in the pocket of the NRA.
As Lichtman scans the horizon to see where things have come in America, seeing an NRA bound and determined to use the Second Amendment’s bastardized interpretation to fill their coffers and hand guns over to anyone and everyone, the need for change seems dire. Citing former Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, John Paul Stevens, Lichtman explores how Congress might go about dismantling this thorn and repeal the Second Amendment. It will not be pretty or easy (with threats of money and slander by the NRA), but will rid the country of a horribly misconstrued constitutional crutch that has helped fuel the bloodshed. Paralleling the repeal with that of Prohibition in the 20th century, Lichtman shows how it would work and which actors would need to stand tall. He ends with a post-repeal America and the need to tighten or create laws to keep America from falling into the hands of the NRA or their apparent abyss of money. Whether it will work is another question, but it is always nice to speculate.
When I was asked to read this book by the publisher, I could not wait to sink my teeth into it. These were the arguments I had long made in my own discussions of the Second Amendment and I found myself agreeing with a lot of what Lichtman had to say. The tome is full of wonderful facts embedded into an easy to comprehend narrative. While there are aspects that have academic explorations, Lichtman keeps the arguments simple enough that anyone could understand. He does not hide his bias, though I cannot see how one could remain entirely neutral on this topic, offering up some fiery criticisms of those who stand idly by and spout vapid sentiments when people—children especially—are dying in senseless ways. While the chapters are not massive, the information encapsulated within them makes for an impactful read and kept me nodding throughout. I was especially interested in Lichtman’s proposal to repeal the Second Amendment, knowing how difficult a process it is (as any constitutional change should be) and where the pitfalls lie with enemies waiting. This is a sobering read for anyone looking to stir up a little controversy at the dinner table or amongst those with strong opinions. If only a discussion could be had where both sides agree on the wording of the topic at hand, leaving well-rounded and firmly grounded ideas to sway opinions.
Kudos, Mr. Lichtman, for not shying away from the controversy. This will take longer than November 3, 2020 to make America great again, but if we can oust the clown, surely this circus can be quelled.
Love/hate the review? An ever-growing collection of others appears at:
http://pecheyponderings.wordpress.com/
A Book for All Seasons, a different sort of Book Challenge: https://www.goodreads.com/group/show/...
January 5, 2022
This is the first book I have read by Lichtman on American policy and politics. He has does some deep digging into the American Bill of Rights and the Second Amendment which relates to the “right” of citizens to own their own guns. He also provides an interpretation of the key words and wording of that Amendment.
Given that, I am surprised that he rushes through the process of amending the Constitution and his comparison the process by which the amendment repealing the prohibition of alcoholic beverages was eventually accomplished. More on that in a little while.
There is no doubt on anyone’s part that guns have been the cause of too many deaths. Whether you talk about gang violence, instances of the police shooting first, or accidents in the home, there is a direct connection between the availability of guns and death from those weapons. What is less a part of the discussion is the immense number of suicides by guns yearly in America (and to a little less extent the number of gun deaths attributed to people under the age of 18). I share Litchman’s outrage that this should be considered normal.
However, his “solution” of repealing the Second Amendment is not practical. His belief that, if enough people are willing to protest, there will be a significant groundswell that will lead to repeal is not grounded in reality. Also, by establishing the repeal as the top priority, he has put practical measures from background checks to gun closets at the back of the line.
Well worth reading but not either an easy read or able to create a lot of optimism about changing the future.
Given that, I am surprised that he rushes through the process of amending the Constitution and his comparison the process by which the amendment repealing the prohibition of alcoholic beverages was eventually accomplished. More on that in a little while.
There is no doubt on anyone’s part that guns have been the cause of too many deaths. Whether you talk about gang violence, instances of the police shooting first, or accidents in the home, there is a direct connection between the availability of guns and death from those weapons. What is less a part of the discussion is the immense number of suicides by guns yearly in America (and to a little less extent the number of gun deaths attributed to people under the age of 18). I share Litchman’s outrage that this should be considered normal.
However, his “solution” of repealing the Second Amendment is not practical. His belief that, if enough people are willing to protest, there will be a significant groundswell that will lead to repeal is not grounded in reality. Also, by establishing the repeal as the top priority, he has put practical measures from background checks to gun closets at the back of the line.
Well worth reading but not either an easy read or able to create a lot of optimism about changing the future.
December 17, 2019
I recently rode a touring bicycle across the USA. It was a journey completed in two stages, the western half during the summer of 2017 and the eastern half, the following summer. Sometimes I rode with other riders and other times solo. Throughout, I carried nothing more lethal than bear spray, a pocket-knife, and my wits. In the middle of North Dakota, I met a friendly and engaging man who was interested in more than just why a solitary cyclist would be pedaling a bicycle loaded down with camping supplies down the streets of Mandan, his hometown. He asked me his questions from behind the wheel of an air-conditioned black Mercedes, talking with me through the open passenger window, a cell phone in one hand, and keeping his speed under 10 mph. His face was younger than mine. He carried a lot of extra pounds. Would I follow him to his office…it was just up ahead…and talk some more?
My planned destination that day was a state campground on the Missouri River and not that far ahead. Learning of it, my friend offered me dinner and conversation, and a place to stay that night…on the condition that I also use his laundry room to wash out the long-sleeved polyester jersey on my back, the one that had been protecting me from the North Dakota sun and wind for several days, and any other clothes that might be in need of attention. It was too good an offer to refuse; including his observation that my shirt smelled badly. That’s what good friends do.
In writing, Repeal the Second Amendment: The Case for a Safer America, author Allan Lichtman writes like a good friend. He’s created a well-researched and insightful book about a narrow niche in current American political history, including his observation that something about our country smells bad. It is the rank odor coming from the ongoing massacres taking place in our schools, churches, and theaters, even our military installations. He concludes his book with a plan to remedy the problem. That’s what good friends do.
Allan Lichtman has a long and distinguished career as a history professor at American University, a teacher of long standing with a specialty in US presidents and presidential succession. He has written extensively on these topics and now focuses on an issue that will likely loom large in the upcoming presidential election, firearm policy and legislation. The book’s first half explains in thoughtful detail the history of guns and their regulation by both state and federal government. The second half tells the history of the NRA and its rise as both political powerhouse and public relations machine, one whose nightmarish vision intends that every man, woman, and child own and carry a gun. In two riveting chapters, Iron Triangle and Follow the Money, the book describes the gun lobby’s acquisition of power and influence, its ties to multinational manufacturers of guns and weapons, and the army of lobbyists and politicians on its payroll. After reading these chapters the reader will have an understanding not of why, but how, the undeclared wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have gone on and on for decades without resolution.
Professor Lichtman credits James Madison with drafting the Constitution’s original Bill of Rights and describes the various forms its Second Amendment took in the early drafts. He describes the Constitution’s early framers as unanimous in their desire to safeguard the federal government with its own militia, so that it could defend itself against internal uprisings. The words that made the final cut, approval of the Continental Congress in 1789 and ratification by the states in 1791, comprise this single sentence:
“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.”
It has yet to be modified by amendment. According to Madison, the essential rights contained in the Constitution were four: Trial by jury, freedom of conscience (worship), freedom of speech, and freedom of the press.
The gun lobby’s contention that the Second Amendment somehow supports all the other rights, is one of many PR myths. Lichtman’s book makes an eloquent case that the NRA of my youth…the one that ran the marksmanship and safe hunter programs…has been corrupted beyond recognition by the wealth of its donors and morphed into a multifaceted, tax dodging chameleon, consisting of multiple charitable foundations and political action committees that pay no taxes, but direct millions into the election campaigns of tractable politicians that dance to their tune. These elected officials ignore the stench of bloody massacres at home, in order to parrot the needs of the NRA’s major donors. That’s how large corporations like Beretta, Colt, Smith & Wesson, Sturm Ruger & Co, and Glock purchase policy and legislation that frees them from regulation or oversight. They profit from the ability to sell their lethal products to any buyer in unregulated markets, to drug cartels and dictatorial regimes, criminal gangs and terrorist cells, even jihadists in distant lands.
It makes no sense that corporations headquartered in Austria (Glock) and Italy (Beretta) should have a stronger voice in American government than the individual citizen with a right to vote.
Most of the changes to the NRA have come about since the election of Wayne LaPierre as CEO in 1996. Wearing his Beverly Hills suits, designer glasses, and coiffed hair, all purchased through a lavish expense account, he reframed the NRA’s message and then escalated it. Coincidently, this change in NRA leadership took place about one year after the Oklahoma City massacre at a large federal office building in which 168 died, including small children, all of it fashioned by a single disenfranchised white male who once proclaimed to an elected official, “I’m the NRA.”
Before LaPierre took over, there was a chance that the victims of these massacres, places like the Aurora Theater, Sandy Hook, and Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, could take weapons manufacturers and arms dealers to court and hold them responsible for the death and destruction caused by their products. That remedy was legislatively stricken in 2005 by President George W Bush when he signed the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) into law. Sponsored by a Senator from Idaho who claimed it would “stop junk lawsuits,” it has since killed off virtually every lawsuit brought in federal court against the gun industry.
I am grateful to live in a country where an aging individual is free to follow their personal dream of riding a bicycle across the continent, to live in a nation in which the borders between states aren’t blocked by checkpoints and uniformed guards, and where people on both sides of those borders share a common language and monetary system. This country is not the danger-filled place the NRA would have us believe. Speaking of beliefs, I believe that the time for holding the gun industry and its dealers accountable and liable for the carnage and crimes committed with their lethal products, is long overdue. That is just one of the reforms proposed by Professor Lichtman in his timely new book: Repeal the Second Amendment: The Case for a Safer America. There are ten more sound recommendations identified in the closing chapters.
I highly recommend his book to anyone who wants to live in a safe community, where children and grandchildren can walk without fear and live out their dreams.
Robert William Case, JD MS
My planned destination that day was a state campground on the Missouri River and not that far ahead. Learning of it, my friend offered me dinner and conversation, and a place to stay that night…on the condition that I also use his laundry room to wash out the long-sleeved polyester jersey on my back, the one that had been protecting me from the North Dakota sun and wind for several days, and any other clothes that might be in need of attention. It was too good an offer to refuse; including his observation that my shirt smelled badly. That’s what good friends do.
In writing, Repeal the Second Amendment: The Case for a Safer America, author Allan Lichtman writes like a good friend. He’s created a well-researched and insightful book about a narrow niche in current American political history, including his observation that something about our country smells bad. It is the rank odor coming from the ongoing massacres taking place in our schools, churches, and theaters, even our military installations. He concludes his book with a plan to remedy the problem. That’s what good friends do.
Allan Lichtman has a long and distinguished career as a history professor at American University, a teacher of long standing with a specialty in US presidents and presidential succession. He has written extensively on these topics and now focuses on an issue that will likely loom large in the upcoming presidential election, firearm policy and legislation. The book’s first half explains in thoughtful detail the history of guns and their regulation by both state and federal government. The second half tells the history of the NRA and its rise as both political powerhouse and public relations machine, one whose nightmarish vision intends that every man, woman, and child own and carry a gun. In two riveting chapters, Iron Triangle and Follow the Money, the book describes the gun lobby’s acquisition of power and influence, its ties to multinational manufacturers of guns and weapons, and the army of lobbyists and politicians on its payroll. After reading these chapters the reader will have an understanding not of why, but how, the undeclared wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have gone on and on for decades without resolution.
Professor Lichtman credits James Madison with drafting the Constitution’s original Bill of Rights and describes the various forms its Second Amendment took in the early drafts. He describes the Constitution’s early framers as unanimous in their desire to safeguard the federal government with its own militia, so that it could defend itself against internal uprisings. The words that made the final cut, approval of the Continental Congress in 1789 and ratification by the states in 1791, comprise this single sentence:
“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.”
It has yet to be modified by amendment. According to Madison, the essential rights contained in the Constitution were four: Trial by jury, freedom of conscience (worship), freedom of speech, and freedom of the press.
The gun lobby’s contention that the Second Amendment somehow supports all the other rights, is one of many PR myths. Lichtman’s book makes an eloquent case that the NRA of my youth…the one that ran the marksmanship and safe hunter programs…has been corrupted beyond recognition by the wealth of its donors and morphed into a multifaceted, tax dodging chameleon, consisting of multiple charitable foundations and political action committees that pay no taxes, but direct millions into the election campaigns of tractable politicians that dance to their tune. These elected officials ignore the stench of bloody massacres at home, in order to parrot the needs of the NRA’s major donors. That’s how large corporations like Beretta, Colt, Smith & Wesson, Sturm Ruger & Co, and Glock purchase policy and legislation that frees them from regulation or oversight. They profit from the ability to sell their lethal products to any buyer in unregulated markets, to drug cartels and dictatorial regimes, criminal gangs and terrorist cells, even jihadists in distant lands.
It makes no sense that corporations headquartered in Austria (Glock) and Italy (Beretta) should have a stronger voice in American government than the individual citizen with a right to vote.
Most of the changes to the NRA have come about since the election of Wayne LaPierre as CEO in 1996. Wearing his Beverly Hills suits, designer glasses, and coiffed hair, all purchased through a lavish expense account, he reframed the NRA’s message and then escalated it. Coincidently, this change in NRA leadership took place about one year after the Oklahoma City massacre at a large federal office building in which 168 died, including small children, all of it fashioned by a single disenfranchised white male who once proclaimed to an elected official, “I’m the NRA.”
Before LaPierre took over, there was a chance that the victims of these massacres, places like the Aurora Theater, Sandy Hook, and Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, could take weapons manufacturers and arms dealers to court and hold them responsible for the death and destruction caused by their products. That remedy was legislatively stricken in 2005 by President George W Bush when he signed the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) into law. Sponsored by a Senator from Idaho who claimed it would “stop junk lawsuits,” it has since killed off virtually every lawsuit brought in federal court against the gun industry.
I am grateful to live in a country where an aging individual is free to follow their personal dream of riding a bicycle across the continent, to live in a nation in which the borders between states aren’t blocked by checkpoints and uniformed guards, and where people on both sides of those borders share a common language and monetary system. This country is not the danger-filled place the NRA would have us believe. Speaking of beliefs, I believe that the time for holding the gun industry and its dealers accountable and liable for the carnage and crimes committed with their lethal products, is long overdue. That is just one of the reforms proposed by Professor Lichtman in his timely new book: Repeal the Second Amendment: The Case for a Safer America. There are ten more sound recommendations identified in the closing chapters.
I highly recommend his book to anyone who wants to live in a safe community, where children and grandchildren can walk without fear and live out their dreams.
Robert William Case, JD MS
January 12, 2020
This book is childish... it's well-written, impressively well-researched, and an interesting read. But I don't think it fulfilled its goal of convincing a reader that America should repeal the 2nd Amendment. So while worth reading (doesn't matter if you support the goal or not, every American should read this book) I say the book is childish because it complains about a problems without offering a practical solution.
To be upfront, I support responsible gun ownership. A firearm is the only way I can see my wife can protect herself and our children against even an unarmed grown man, and the only way I can see myself protecting my family from more than one. That said, I know that guns are a problem in the U.S., and this book will hopefully start more conversations.
In college, I bought a gun from a friend of a friend to go hunting... it was an illegal gun sale by today's standards, but until Lichtman offers an idea of how to prevent this exact sale from happening now, I want my gun.
Most of the book is academic whining... Lichtman does a great job of introducing why guns are a problem, but I don't see an instance of him offering a *practical* solution. He offers statistics from the U.S. (good), from other countries (not especially helpful, since different cultures don't compare well, just look at differing immigration and health care laws within the same countries Lichtman offers as example of "good" gun laws), and literally 150 year old statistics (I don't think gun laws from the Old West are applicable Allan, I think the stats are valid but I don't think you can compare them to now.
I still think this book is worth reading, by everyone. If you can't read something that disagrees with your viewpoints, I think your viewpoints are immature at best, and wrong at worst.
To be upfront, I support responsible gun ownership. A firearm is the only way I can see my wife can protect herself and our children against even an unarmed grown man, and the only way I can see myself protecting my family from more than one. That said, I know that guns are a problem in the U.S., and this book will hopefully start more conversations.
In college, I bought a gun from a friend of a friend to go hunting... it was an illegal gun sale by today's standards, but until Lichtman offers an idea of how to prevent this exact sale from happening now, I want my gun.
Most of the book is academic whining... Lichtman does a great job of introducing why guns are a problem, but I don't see an instance of him offering a *practical* solution. He offers statistics from the U.S. (good), from other countries (not especially helpful, since different cultures don't compare well, just look at differing immigration and health care laws within the same countries Lichtman offers as example of "good" gun laws), and literally 150 year old statistics (I don't think gun laws from the Old West are applicable Allan, I think the stats are valid but I don't think you can compare them to now.
I still think this book is worth reading, by everyone. If you can't read something that disagrees with your viewpoints, I think your viewpoints are immature at best, and wrong at worst.
April 20, 2021
With its admittedly provocative title, this book probably won't be read by those that should; those unaware or unwilling to accept the truth about the true intent of the second amendment or have been duped or under the influence of the gun mythology perpetuated by the NRA but will be instead read by people like me who are already convinced of the absolute necessity of strict, immediate gun safety regulations in the US or maybe read by people outside the US who wonder if we've gone crazy.
Lichtman is a professor and some of the book is a bit dense, reading like a master class, with chapters ranging from the effects of gun violence, the history of the 2nd amendment and the Heller ruling, Congress, money, and politicians ( Republican party), and the gun industry and the NRA role in the perpetuation of guns and gun deaths in America. He also includes list of and answers to the most common arguments/ platitudes) by gun lobbyist( now is not the time, guns don't kill people, people kill people, slippery slope, etc.) And a list of practical gun safety reforms ( regulate ghost guns, ban assault weapons, red flag laws, background checks), A nice mix of intellectual and practical. Professor Lichtman lastly makes a credible case for repeal of the amendment, arguing the constitution is not a static document, amendments and repeals have occurred before, citing repeal of the 18 amendment. However, I doubt few will be convinced of this course of action.
This is a book I wish everyone in America would read. Gun rights are not God given, as the familiar phrase goes. The lack of historical perspective and gross misinformation regarding the 2nd amendment is so entrenched in the American psyche, I think it will take at least another generation to right itself. If as a country, for what ever reason, we fail to actively protect even babies from gun violence, where the individual rights or commerce supersedes the safety of the whole , we are doomed.
Gun Advocates that rely and praise Scalia for making his landmark ruling in Heller fail to recognize this added clause:
' Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. it is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court's opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on the long-standing prohibition on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentality ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms'
Lichtman is a professor and some of the book is a bit dense, reading like a master class, with chapters ranging from the effects of gun violence, the history of the 2nd amendment and the Heller ruling, Congress, money, and politicians ( Republican party), and the gun industry and the NRA role in the perpetuation of guns and gun deaths in America. He also includes list of and answers to the most common arguments/ platitudes) by gun lobbyist( now is not the time, guns don't kill people, people kill people, slippery slope, etc.) And a list of practical gun safety reforms ( regulate ghost guns, ban assault weapons, red flag laws, background checks), A nice mix of intellectual and practical. Professor Lichtman lastly makes a credible case for repeal of the amendment, arguing the constitution is not a static document, amendments and repeals have occurred before, citing repeal of the 18 amendment. However, I doubt few will be convinced of this course of action.
This is a book I wish everyone in America would read. Gun rights are not God given, as the familiar phrase goes. The lack of historical perspective and gross misinformation regarding the 2nd amendment is so entrenched in the American psyche, I think it will take at least another generation to right itself. If as a country, for what ever reason, we fail to actively protect even babies from gun violence, where the individual rights or commerce supersedes the safety of the whole , we are doomed.
Gun Advocates that rely and praise Scalia for making his landmark ruling in Heller fail to recognize this added clause:
' Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. it is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court's opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on the long-standing prohibition on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentality ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms'
0-maybe-arc-r2r
January 6, 2020Curious as to how repeal of Second Amendment would affect/control gun violence in US. Would making X verboten = reduction in Y? Perhaps in straight stats, but what’s the tougher/more critical issue—gun used or violence done?
Or more pertinently, the reasons/causes underlying &/or triggering such violence? After all, oft-quoted argument = ‘guns don’t kill people; people kill people’, no?
(IMHO, said argument is trite & utterly discounts fact that guns make wounding & killing people so much easier & faster. Frex, highly doubt use of a blade weapon -vs- semi-auto would result in same level of injuries &/or casualties.)
_______
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.
If ever an argument for demanding clarity & precision in writing, amiright? Oh, the problems a comma (or missing word) or two can cause... And WTH happened in 2008 w/ Heller??
Background: On 25 September 1789, First Congress proposed 12 amendments to US Constitution. Of 12 contained in 1789 Joint Resolution of Congress, 10 were ratified on 15 December 1791 (yup, 2 yrs later) = US Bill of Rights. (Note that ‘Article the fourth’ became Second Amendment.)
Or more pertinently, the reasons/causes underlying &/or triggering such violence? After all, oft-quoted argument = ‘guns don’t kill people; people kill people’, no?
(IMHO, said argument is trite & utterly discounts fact that guns make wounding & killing people so much easier & faster. Frex, highly doubt use of a blade weapon -vs- semi-auto would result in same level of injuries &/or casualties.)
_______
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.
If ever an argument for demanding clarity & precision in writing, amiright? Oh, the problems a comma (or missing word) or two can cause... And WTH happened in 2008 w/ Heller??
Background: On 25 September 1789, First Congress proposed 12 amendments to US Constitution. Of 12 contained in 1789 Joint Resolution of Congress, 10 were ratified on 15 December 1791 (yup, 2 yrs later) = US Bill of Rights. (Note that ‘Article the fourth’ became Second Amendment.)
July 26, 2021
Allan Lichtman transformed and illuminated my understanding of the second amendment. I initially was confused why the US was the only westernized country that had such an amendment. First I was unaware that this amendment applies to a collective, specifically a militia, not an individual, right to bear arms. Even the NRA, at least historically, recognized the amendment protected a militia not private gun ownership for self-defense. It remained irrelevant to enact gun control laws for 200 years until in 2008 in a 5-4 decision the US Supreme changed their interpretation of this amendment. Second, Lichtman’s data comparing gun violence in the America compared to other countries shocked me. Compared to those in similar democracies an American was over twenty times more likely to die from gun homicide. Third, he revealed how the NRA “reinvented” the second amendment and supported political candidates that supported their reinterpretation by throwing heaps of $ toward them. Finally, Lichtman brilliantly articulates a pathway to repeal this amendment that would result in a safer amendment. Despite the solid data Lichtman provided to support his statements he writes clearly and persuasively offering a remarkably readable book. All Americans should read this book. I suspect I am not the only US citizen who has incorrectly interpreted the second amendment.
April 5, 2020
A one sided view that totally makes assumptions and then presents them as facts. He doesn't acknowledge any worth for gun ownership, only saying that gun owners have them to take down our oppressive government (a hard core radical idea) or to hunt with. He ignores data that conflicts with his ideas. (The right does this too). I agree something's must be done but repel the 2nd amendment is crazy. He made a good case against the NRA which I'm against but he goes way to far.
March 14, 2023
I wholeheartedly agree with every point in this book. The problem, of course, is that no one who disagrees with the basic premise will ever read it. However, Lichtman argues that the most productive road forward will be to consolidate and mobilize the gun control contingent to flex its collective muscle, rather than try to persuade the gun rights folks to change their mind. This is a relief, as many if not most of the latter are impervious to rational argumentation, no matter how well-supported; the rightness of their position is an article of faith, which is sometimes actually strengthened by a mountain of contravening empirical evidence.
I want to conclude by glossing Lichtman's most important argument: the current reading of the 2nd Amendment is NEW. Prior to the 1970's, almost no one, neither the Founding Fathers nor the early NRA, held that the 2nd Amendment guaranteed an individual's right to own and carry a firearm. As such, the current pro-gun orthodoxy on the subject actually represents a wildly liberal innovation on the original meaning and intent of the Constitution.
I want to conclude by glossing Lichtman's most important argument: the current reading of the 2nd Amendment is NEW. Prior to the 1970's, almost no one, neither the Founding Fathers nor the early NRA, held that the 2nd Amendment guaranteed an individual's right to own and carry a firearm. As such, the current pro-gun orthodoxy on the subject actually represents a wildly liberal innovation on the original meaning and intent of the Constitution.
March 8, 2021
Freedom and liberty are two words that are not synonymous with Repeal the Second Amendment. This review must be written much like Lichtman states as the beginning of his book. While it appears Lichtman did some clever research, one might not hear the whole picture when he represents firearm owners as alien and lizard people believing savages or when he refers to gun-rights groups as “militant”. I can attest that not all firearm aficionados are as previously stated.
Firstly, Lichtman depicts “Guns in Early America”. He discussed how the British established a precedent for gun control in pre-1776 America that was adopted by American colonies at that time. American Patriots did not want to be under British rule, hence, the American Revolution. Why would those same standards still exist after American Independence? They would not exist is the answer. Freedom means to rid oneself of those repulsive standards. I surely would not want to be under tyrannical British rule today.
Time after time, Lichtman tries to portray how firearms rights are a collective right, not an individual right to bear arms. American values and customs were built on the rugged individualism mentality. When the Federalist Papers were written, Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and James Madison describe why the American public should adopt the Constitution. They made it clear that they did not want a federal government to intrude on liberty. What was the guard against such an intrusion? The cure was a non-professional militia made up of individual citizens with the private right to bear arms with the word “People” included in the Second Amendment. For further clarification, read Federalist Papers #28 and #29.
I need to thank Lichtman for recognizing that the National Rifle Association (NRA) needs reform. It is necessary to put people in power with integrity. Lichtman points out that how he feels that the NRA is a well-funded political organization. Last time I checked, I have not found a billionaire donating to the gun-rights movement. The gun-rights groups are small individual donors. The militant Moms Demand Action and Everytown for Gun Safety do have a billionaire donor. If you do happen to find a billionaire wanting to donate to preserving freedom, that would be swell.
Let us talk about violence. That is the basic premise of wanting to enact gun control. Lichtman’s audience refers to this violence as “gun violence”. I did not find any recommendations mentioned helpful because one cannot trust a liar. On page 241, the real Lichtman appears with the following statement, “Lawmakers need not worry that any reforms proposed here involves the confiscation of firearms…”. Buybacks of firearms is mentioned. The word “buyback” is associated with confiscation because one cannot buyback an item that is not for sale without confiscating stated item.
In summary, Lichtman’s idea of abolishing the Second Amendment is dangerous to the upmost degree. A similar idea would be to abolish private property rights protected in the Constitution. If you fear firearms and crime, do not ever call the police to come save you because they have a firearm as well. Instead, I challenge you to go to a gun range and shoot a firearm. When you take some responsibility for yourself and tell yourself that you can accomplish your goals, you will not feel powerless in the face of adversity.
Firstly, Lichtman depicts “Guns in Early America”. He discussed how the British established a precedent for gun control in pre-1776 America that was adopted by American colonies at that time. American Patriots did not want to be under British rule, hence, the American Revolution. Why would those same standards still exist after American Independence? They would not exist is the answer. Freedom means to rid oneself of those repulsive standards. I surely would not want to be under tyrannical British rule today.
Time after time, Lichtman tries to portray how firearms rights are a collective right, not an individual right to bear arms. American values and customs were built on the rugged individualism mentality. When the Federalist Papers were written, Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and James Madison describe why the American public should adopt the Constitution. They made it clear that they did not want a federal government to intrude on liberty. What was the guard against such an intrusion? The cure was a non-professional militia made up of individual citizens with the private right to bear arms with the word “People” included in the Second Amendment. For further clarification, read Federalist Papers #28 and #29.
I need to thank Lichtman for recognizing that the National Rifle Association (NRA) needs reform. It is necessary to put people in power with integrity. Lichtman points out that how he feels that the NRA is a well-funded political organization. Last time I checked, I have not found a billionaire donating to the gun-rights movement. The gun-rights groups are small individual donors. The militant Moms Demand Action and Everytown for Gun Safety do have a billionaire donor. If you do happen to find a billionaire wanting to donate to preserving freedom, that would be swell.
Let us talk about violence. That is the basic premise of wanting to enact gun control. Lichtman’s audience refers to this violence as “gun violence”. I did not find any recommendations mentioned helpful because one cannot trust a liar. On page 241, the real Lichtman appears with the following statement, “Lawmakers need not worry that any reforms proposed here involves the confiscation of firearms…”. Buybacks of firearms is mentioned. The word “buyback” is associated with confiscation because one cannot buyback an item that is not for sale without confiscating stated item.
In summary, Lichtman’s idea of abolishing the Second Amendment is dangerous to the upmost degree. A similar idea would be to abolish private property rights protected in the Constitution. If you fear firearms and crime, do not ever call the police to come save you because they have a firearm as well. Instead, I challenge you to go to a gun range and shoot a firearm. When you take some responsibility for yourself and tell yourself that you can accomplish your goals, you will not feel powerless in the face of adversity.
February 29, 2020
“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.” How did a once inconsequential, dismissed, and somewhat forgotten, sliver of the United States Constitution become such a hotbed of political strife and the source of overwhelming, mass violence? In Repeal the Second Amendment: The Case for a Safer America, Allan Lichtman, a distinguished professor of history at American University, draws upon a wealth of source material and meticulous historical research to explain how the National Rifle Association (NRA) has hijacked the history of the Second Amendment. In an effort to convince gun control advocates that they must pursue the repeal of the Second Amendment, Lichtman probes the history of firearms and gun regulations from colonial times to the present to detail the ways in which the NRA has manufactured a distorted history of gun ownership in America. Lichtman argues that the “iron triangle” of the gun lobby, the gun industry, and an array of pro-gun (mostly Republican) politicians have used a twisted and misleading history of the Second Amendment to advance their own interests, and enrich their pockets, while entrapping Americans into an endless cycle of gun violence. To solve American’s gun violence problem, Lichtman concludes, the Second Amendment must be repealed.
In Lichtman’s view, gun control advocates have been fighting a losing battle because they have fallen too eagerly into a defensive position that attempts to support the Second Amendment as a measure protecting a private right to own guns while also advocating for effective gun control measures. “By playing not to lose,” Lichtman explains, “the gun control movement has been losing. It wins only by becoming as bold and uncompromising as the gun lobby.” As Lichtman contends, it is time for gun control reformers to inspire a different political reality and set the terms for a fresh debate regarding gun violence and responsible gun ownership in America. That debate begins by recapturing the more accurate but, nonetheless, neglected history of the Second Amendment.
Lichtman’s brilliantly thorough and precise research in Repeal the Second Amendment shows how the work of historians, and other scholars, can engage a wider stream of audiences and guide public debate towards a more productive pathway for inciting essential change. In 2019 alone there were 419 mass-shooting incidents and almost 40,000 deaths related to gun violence. That madness needs to stop. The lunacy around the historically inaccurate and deceitfully contrived notion of an absolute, ungovernable private right to keep and bear any and all firearms needs to stop. As Lichtman persuaively argues, the insidious gun violence crisis that has plagued the United States can only be attended to once gun control reformers reclaim the Second Amendment’s history and move towards the amendment’s repeal.
In Lichtman’s view, gun control advocates have been fighting a losing battle because they have fallen too eagerly into a defensive position that attempts to support the Second Amendment as a measure protecting a private right to own guns while also advocating for effective gun control measures. “By playing not to lose,” Lichtman explains, “the gun control movement has been losing. It wins only by becoming as bold and uncompromising as the gun lobby.” As Lichtman contends, it is time for gun control reformers to inspire a different political reality and set the terms for a fresh debate regarding gun violence and responsible gun ownership in America. That debate begins by recapturing the more accurate but, nonetheless, neglected history of the Second Amendment.
Lichtman’s brilliantly thorough and precise research in Repeal the Second Amendment shows how the work of historians, and other scholars, can engage a wider stream of audiences and guide public debate towards a more productive pathway for inciting essential change. In 2019 alone there were 419 mass-shooting incidents and almost 40,000 deaths related to gun violence. That madness needs to stop. The lunacy around the historically inaccurate and deceitfully contrived notion of an absolute, ungovernable private right to keep and bear any and all firearms needs to stop. As Lichtman persuaively argues, the insidious gun violence crisis that has plagued the United States can only be attended to once gun control reformers reclaim the Second Amendment’s history and move towards the amendment’s repeal.
February 24, 2023
Every year, 15k+ Americans were killed by a gun. An American is 20 times more likely to be murdered by a gun compared to residents of peer democratic nations. Mass shootings are so rampant it's a daily occurrence by now. Americans no longer feel safe in their homes, on the streets, in schools, universities, shopping malls, grocery stores, parks, restaurants, cinemas, music concerts and places of worship. Mass shootings can occur at any place and at any time without warning.
America has 647 mass shootings in 2022 alone. Not even the first quarter of this year has passed, and there are already 71 mass shootings recorded so far.
All the other peer democratic nations have the same issues as America (mental health, drug addictions, violent video games, poverty, racism, school dropouts, gangsters etc.) but none of them has an extremely high gun crime rate and rampant mass shootings. The answer is they all have strict gun control laws.
Case in point, Australia. Australia banned guns after one mass shooting, and their gun crimes and gun suicides rate decreased ever since. Mass shooting rarely occurs ever since. If anything, they are now one of the safest countries in the world. If Australia and the rest of the peer democratic nations can do this, then so can America.
The NRA has successfully reinvented the 2A as an individual right to keep and bear arms, and in doing so, opposing any kind of gun control laws as an infringement of that right by an absolutist interpretation. They oppose the laws that will keep Americans safe and protect them from gun violence. The laws that will keep guns from falling into the wrong hands.
Because of the 2A, the Supreme Court can strike down any gun control laws as unconstitutional. This means any kind of gun control laws that were passed have no guarantee of surviving long-term. And gun control laws worked as we've seen in all the other peer democratic nations.
To break this curse and finally put an end to the gun violence epidemic is by repealing the 2A. Only then can gun control laws take place and protect Americans from being incessantly murdered by guns. Just think of all the lives that we could've safe if we had strict gun control laws.
Repealing the 2A doesn’t mean law-abiding citizens can’t own guns for self-defense, sports shooting or hunting. What it will do is opening doors for strict gun control laws. America’s gun control laws are so loose that everyone, including criminals and dangerous people, can own guns. Gun control laws worked in curbing gun violence. They keep people safe by keeping guns from falling into the wrong hands. Meaning instead of 15k+ gun homicides annually, we might have 1k or lower gun homicides annually. Just think of the lives we could’ve saved had we had strict gun control laws.
But then you might say some states have strict gun laws but they still have high gun homicides and mass shootings. That’s because guns can cross state lines. Illinois and California might have strict gun laws, but go to Indiana or Texas, you can buy a gun without the same processes as those of the previous two states. Most guns found at the crime scenes in states with strict gun laws are actually acquired from states with loose gun laws. Meaning gun control laws need to be federal for them to work, not the current piecemeal individual state-level.
And to all those who said repealing the 2A is impossible, do you know what else is impossible 27 years ago? Same-sex marriage. It has only 27% support in 1996. Now it's 71%. Not only that but same-sex marriage is also legalized and has the same rights as the opposite sex.
Right now, support for the 2A repeal is 21%, a little lower than same-sex marriage.
Prohibition was passed in 1919. Turns out it was counterproductive and made America more unsafe. It was then followed by growing support for Prohibition repeal. In 1931, Charles Merz, a respected political analyst said the Prohibition repeal was a pipe dream. 2 years later, it was repealed.
Popularity grows over time if more and more people demand it. Changes don't happen by themselves. People need to get behind the causes to make them a reality.
This is a truly eye-opening, insightful, illuminating, educational and inspiring book. It made me optimistic that changes can happen. It's not an overnight change, but it's not entirely impossible.
I salute Professor Lichtman for doing this thankless and noble task of disputing the gun lobby's falsehoods and preaching the truth. He has done more than enough for this world by writing this important book. The gun lobby and its associates have done incredible and profound damage to America by making Americans captive to the endless cycle of gun violence just because of their fraudulent interpretations of the 2A.
I highly recommend everyone read this book. Everyone should read this book and deserves (and should) know the truth about the 2A and the NRA. This book also has all the historical arguments that gun control advocates and everyone needed to combat pro-gun advocates' arguments. Share this book with your friends and family. Share it on social media. The world, in this case, Americans, deserve to know the truth and the right to live safely and peacefully from gun violence.
America has 647 mass shootings in 2022 alone. Not even the first quarter of this year has passed, and there are already 71 mass shootings recorded so far.
All the other peer democratic nations have the same issues as America (mental health, drug addictions, violent video games, poverty, racism, school dropouts, gangsters etc.) but none of them has an extremely high gun crime rate and rampant mass shootings. The answer is they all have strict gun control laws.
Case in point, Australia. Australia banned guns after one mass shooting, and their gun crimes and gun suicides rate decreased ever since. Mass shooting rarely occurs ever since. If anything, they are now one of the safest countries in the world. If Australia and the rest of the peer democratic nations can do this, then so can America.
The NRA has successfully reinvented the 2A as an individual right to keep and bear arms, and in doing so, opposing any kind of gun control laws as an infringement of that right by an absolutist interpretation. They oppose the laws that will keep Americans safe and protect them from gun violence. The laws that will keep guns from falling into the wrong hands.
Because of the 2A, the Supreme Court can strike down any gun control laws as unconstitutional. This means any kind of gun control laws that were passed have no guarantee of surviving long-term. And gun control laws worked as we've seen in all the other peer democratic nations.
To break this curse and finally put an end to the gun violence epidemic is by repealing the 2A. Only then can gun control laws take place and protect Americans from being incessantly murdered by guns. Just think of all the lives that we could've safe if we had strict gun control laws.
Repealing the 2A doesn’t mean law-abiding citizens can’t own guns for self-defense, sports shooting or hunting. What it will do is opening doors for strict gun control laws. America’s gun control laws are so loose that everyone, including criminals and dangerous people, can own guns. Gun control laws worked in curbing gun violence. They keep people safe by keeping guns from falling into the wrong hands. Meaning instead of 15k+ gun homicides annually, we might have 1k or lower gun homicides annually. Just think of the lives we could’ve saved had we had strict gun control laws.
But then you might say some states have strict gun laws but they still have high gun homicides and mass shootings. That’s because guns can cross state lines. Illinois and California might have strict gun laws, but go to Indiana or Texas, you can buy a gun without the same processes as those of the previous two states. Most guns found at the crime scenes in states with strict gun laws are actually acquired from states with loose gun laws. Meaning gun control laws need to be federal for them to work, not the current piecemeal individual state-level.
And to all those who said repealing the 2A is impossible, do you know what else is impossible 27 years ago? Same-sex marriage. It has only 27% support in 1996. Now it's 71%. Not only that but same-sex marriage is also legalized and has the same rights as the opposite sex.
Right now, support for the 2A repeal is 21%, a little lower than same-sex marriage.
Prohibition was passed in 1919. Turns out it was counterproductive and made America more unsafe. It was then followed by growing support for Prohibition repeal. In 1931, Charles Merz, a respected political analyst said the Prohibition repeal was a pipe dream. 2 years later, it was repealed.
Popularity grows over time if more and more people demand it. Changes don't happen by themselves. People need to get behind the causes to make them a reality.
This is a truly eye-opening, insightful, illuminating, educational and inspiring book. It made me optimistic that changes can happen. It's not an overnight change, but it's not entirely impossible.
I salute Professor Lichtman for doing this thankless and noble task of disputing the gun lobby's falsehoods and preaching the truth. He has done more than enough for this world by writing this important book. The gun lobby and its associates have done incredible and profound damage to America by making Americans captive to the endless cycle of gun violence just because of their fraudulent interpretations of the 2A.
I highly recommend everyone read this book. Everyone should read this book and deserves (and should) know the truth about the 2A and the NRA. This book also has all the historical arguments that gun control advocates and everyone needed to combat pro-gun advocates' arguments. Share this book with your friends and family. Share it on social media. The world, in this case, Americans, deserve to know the truth and the right to live safely and peacefully from gun violence.
August 26, 2023
Something Has to be Done!
The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution 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.”
Allan Lichtman comes at the abysmal record of the U.S. in managing gun violence with a simple, yet audacious plan - eliminate the Second Amendment. He notes that this Amendment was effectively a non-issue until the late 20th Century as it was seen up to that point in time as protecting a well-regulated militia. However, some time in the 1980’s, the NRA, under new leadership and with the help of the Supreme Court, reinvented the Amendment and distorted its originalist intent to claim a virtually unlimited right to keep and bear private arms. This individual-rights construction of the Second Amendment has been marketed and financed relentlessly by the NRA ever since.
The book is necessarily dry in describing much of the ebb and flow of gun rights versus gun control advocates over the years. In earlier days (the 1960’s) acts of political violence and assassination gave rise to calls for greater control but more recently even mass shootings cause very little outcry and even fewer calls to change gun control laws. Lichtman dissects much of the mendacity of the NRA leadership in their quest to eliminate common sense reforms. Having done that, he goes on to argue that the gun control movement needs to go on the offense by eliminating the Second Amendment.
How can this be done?
Lichtman uses the 18th Amendment relating to the prohibition of liquor in 1919 and its subsequent overturn by the 21st Amendment in 1933 as the template. Many of the issues and tactics are consistent with the 2nd Amendment. No part of the Constitution is immutable, argues Lichtman. Same-sex marriage was recently ratified by the Supreme Court. He does not trivialize the enormity of such a task, but he does note that the time for a piecemeal approach centered around “we support the Second Amendment, but….” argument no longer passes muster. Further he notes that the political activism of young people, often the survivors of mass shootings could be the galvanizing force to get something done.
What should they do?
- Get organized, structure under an umbrella group (e.g. Everytown for Gun Safety) with some coordinated sub-groups (e.g. Moms Demand Action).
- Launch an education campaign exposing the history of the 2nd Amendment and the NRA’s role.
- Get one or more high profile and appealing spokespeople
- Get some guns rights advocates who have changed their mind on-board (perhaps victims of gun violence)
- Emphasize an ongoing role for the NRA akin to its original charter of supporting hunting, firearm safety and the like.
How confident am I?
I believed that the horror of Sandy Hook and the task force subsequently led by Joe Biden would see their proposals come to fruition. They didn’t. But that doesn’t mean that people should give up or lose hope. Could the 2nd Amendment be repealed? It is a worthy goal and the passion and commitment of today’s youth could be a decisive factor. Failing this, a more incremental approach still represents progress - take some wins when you can get them. I would also preempt the arguments of the guns rights people by promoting mental health steps in conjunction with meaningful gun control reform.
Bottom Line
One of the stranger things about living in the U.S. is its fascination with guns and the influence wielded by the NRA, notwithstanding the many tragic mass shootings over the past decade or so. This book made me think about gun control in bolder terms - overturning the 2nd Amendment. It is worth reading from that perspective and then each of us doing what we can to reduce the amount of senseless violence and death resulting (in part) from a deliberate misconstruction of the founding fathers intent.
The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution 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.”
Allan Lichtman comes at the abysmal record of the U.S. in managing gun violence with a simple, yet audacious plan - eliminate the Second Amendment. He notes that this Amendment was effectively a non-issue until the late 20th Century as it was seen up to that point in time as protecting a well-regulated militia. However, some time in the 1980’s, the NRA, under new leadership and with the help of the Supreme Court, reinvented the Amendment and distorted its originalist intent to claim a virtually unlimited right to keep and bear private arms. This individual-rights construction of the Second Amendment has been marketed and financed relentlessly by the NRA ever since.
The book is necessarily dry in describing much of the ebb and flow of gun rights versus gun control advocates over the years. In earlier days (the 1960’s) acts of political violence and assassination gave rise to calls for greater control but more recently even mass shootings cause very little outcry and even fewer calls to change gun control laws. Lichtman dissects much of the mendacity of the NRA leadership in their quest to eliminate common sense reforms. Having done that, he goes on to argue that the gun control movement needs to go on the offense by eliminating the Second Amendment.
How can this be done?
Lichtman uses the 18th Amendment relating to the prohibition of liquor in 1919 and its subsequent overturn by the 21st Amendment in 1933 as the template. Many of the issues and tactics are consistent with the 2nd Amendment. No part of the Constitution is immutable, argues Lichtman. Same-sex marriage was recently ratified by the Supreme Court. He does not trivialize the enormity of such a task, but he does note that the time for a piecemeal approach centered around “we support the Second Amendment, but….” argument no longer passes muster. Further he notes that the political activism of young people, often the survivors of mass shootings could be the galvanizing force to get something done.
What should they do?
- Get organized, structure under an umbrella group (e.g. Everytown for Gun Safety) with some coordinated sub-groups (e.g. Moms Demand Action).
- Launch an education campaign exposing the history of the 2nd Amendment and the NRA’s role.
- Get one or more high profile and appealing spokespeople
- Get some guns rights advocates who have changed their mind on-board (perhaps victims of gun violence)
- Emphasize an ongoing role for the NRA akin to its original charter of supporting hunting, firearm safety and the like.
How confident am I?
I believed that the horror of Sandy Hook and the task force subsequently led by Joe Biden would see their proposals come to fruition. They didn’t. But that doesn’t mean that people should give up or lose hope. Could the 2nd Amendment be repealed? It is a worthy goal and the passion and commitment of today’s youth could be a decisive factor. Failing this, a more incremental approach still represents progress - take some wins when you can get them. I would also preempt the arguments of the guns rights people by promoting mental health steps in conjunction with meaningful gun control reform.
Bottom Line
One of the stranger things about living in the U.S. is its fascination with guns and the influence wielded by the NRA, notwithstanding the many tragic mass shootings over the past decade or so. This book made me think about gun control in bolder terms - overturning the 2nd Amendment. It is worth reading from that perspective and then each of us doing what we can to reduce the amount of senseless violence and death resulting (in part) from a deliberate misconstruction of the founding fathers intent.
August 13, 2025
The premise of this book was very interesting. It has its share of positives and negatives.
Positives:
1. The author makes a great case for the ambiguity of the second amendment. This amendment was ratified in the late 1700s and obviously firearms were VERY different than they are today.
2. Provides a great analysis about the history of the NRA and its growing influence with its lobby in government.
3. Most of what is stated about the myths of self-defence and more guns mean less crime is mostly accurate. mostly.
Negatives:
1. Compares gun laws of the U.S. to other countries like Japan and Australia. It's like comparing apples to oranges because places like Japan have a different history, population, culture, and geography compared to the U.S. Japan tends to be more collectivist whereas the U.S. is more individualist, especially in rural areas because law enforcement in rural areas is sparse.
2. Underestimates the criminal element when it comes to firearms. Even if the 2nd amendment were repealed, there would still be a sizeable black market. Most people with antisocial traits are willing to take the risk, that's just reality.
3. The most important point is that as of 2025, and in the near future, repealing the second amendment is VERY unlikely to happen. If you look into the process of repealing an amendment, it would take a substantial effort on the part of government and the states where 75% would have to approve, and I don't see that happening any time soon given the current government management.
Although the author brings up some valid points, I doubt it will sway anyone's opinion. If you're pro-gun, you'll still be pro gun. If you're anti-gun, you'll still be anti-gun.
Positives:
1. The author makes a great case for the ambiguity of the second amendment. This amendment was ratified in the late 1700s and obviously firearms were VERY different than they are today.
2. Provides a great analysis about the history of the NRA and its growing influence with its lobby in government.
3. Most of what is stated about the myths of self-defence and more guns mean less crime is mostly accurate. mostly.
Negatives:
1. Compares gun laws of the U.S. to other countries like Japan and Australia. It's like comparing apples to oranges because places like Japan have a different history, population, culture, and geography compared to the U.S. Japan tends to be more collectivist whereas the U.S. is more individualist, especially in rural areas because law enforcement in rural areas is sparse.
2. Underestimates the criminal element when it comes to firearms. Even if the 2nd amendment were repealed, there would still be a sizeable black market. Most people with antisocial traits are willing to take the risk, that's just reality.
3. The most important point is that as of 2025, and in the near future, repealing the second amendment is VERY unlikely to happen. If you look into the process of repealing an amendment, it would take a substantial effort on the part of government and the states where 75% would have to approve, and I don't see that happening any time soon given the current government management.
Although the author brings up some valid points, I doubt it will sway anyone's opinion. If you're pro-gun, you'll still be pro gun. If you're anti-gun, you'll still be anti-gun.
Read
January 22, 2025Brings an interesting twist into gun control/reform discourse. The following is some of my highlights that I can list off the top of my head:
Scalia's forfeiting of his touted originalist perspective of understanding the Constitution in favor of judicial activism.
James Madison: "No theoretical checks- no form of government can render us secure, To suppose that any form of government will secure liberty or happiness without any virtue in the people, is a chimerical idea" p44
An individual right to keep and bear private arms is not rooted in early-American traditions, but is an anachronism imposed on history by modern gun rights activists p30
The slew of statistics that invariably prove that regulating firearms would directly lead to tens of thousands of saved lives by either homicide or suicide.
debunking the idea that firearms are effective in self-defense situations. The lives that are lost to unregulated firearms FAR exceed the number of situations resolved by firearms. I particularly enjoy Lichtman's comment towards the conclusion of the book where he implores his opposition to invest in long-reaching bear spray. He then said that if one does not believe bear spray would be impactful in a real conflict, they should try it on themself and let us know how it goes!
I was most interested in Lichtman's argument to completely repeal the amendment (which really just advocates for the arming of militias in wartime), a solution that seemed to be an extreme to me. Seeing his reasoning creates another image though (as things often do).
Scalia's forfeiting of his touted originalist perspective of understanding the Constitution in favor of judicial activism.
James Madison: "No theoretical checks- no form of government can render us secure, To suppose that any form of government will secure liberty or happiness without any virtue in the people, is a chimerical idea" p44
An individual right to keep and bear private arms is not rooted in early-American traditions, but is an anachronism imposed on history by modern gun rights activists p30
The slew of statistics that invariably prove that regulating firearms would directly lead to tens of thousands of saved lives by either homicide or suicide.
debunking the idea that firearms are effective in self-defense situations. The lives that are lost to unregulated firearms FAR exceed the number of situations resolved by firearms. I particularly enjoy Lichtman's comment towards the conclusion of the book where he implores his opposition to invest in long-reaching bear spray. He then said that if one does not believe bear spray would be impactful in a real conflict, they should try it on themself and let us know how it goes!
I was most interested in Lichtman's argument to completely repeal the amendment (which really just advocates for the arming of militias in wartime), a solution that seemed to be an extreme to me. Seeing his reasoning creates another image though (as things often do).
June 11, 2022
Five stars, with the caveat that I do not think that repealing the second amendment is possible. Even if we did reach a point where enough people wanted to repeal, it would literally cause a civil war.
That being said, I found the history of the second amendment, as well as the rise of the NRA and the shift in interpretation of the second amendment very fascinating.
That being said, I found the history of the second amendment, as well as the rise of the NRA and the shift in interpretation of the second amendment very fascinating.
November 25, 2024
Not nearly as radical as the title makes it sound. Most of it is a straightforward history of the problem of gun violence in America and the machinations of the NRA. The last section outlines a pie-in-the-sky vision for actually repealing the 2nd amendment.
Displaying 1 - 18 of 18 reviews