This week the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals announced that the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution does not protect the right to concealed carry in public, thus igniting the firearms argument for the millionth time in this country this year (I may or may not be exaggerating that fact). Well, let's look at the language within the amendment:

"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."

So yeah, technically the court's right. There's nothing in this important piece of literature ratified in 1791 talking about concealed carry, but then again, it makes no real effort to address how one should bear their arms. Am I supposed to hip carry my pistol in a holster? Maybe across my chest or under my armpit? Perhaps in the front of my pants (personal reservations aside) with my shirt tucked behind it? How about in my hand as I go retrieve the day's mail?

Smartass comments aside, that's not really the point. The topic at hand addresses gun rights as a whole.

The Second Amendment is often treated like a religion -- There are those that will worship at its altar dogmatically while telling others how foolish it is to believe that no person, regardless of background, should be unarmed. Then there are those that will decry it, saying that those who believe in it bow down to a less civilized, more uninformed age that has no place in modern society.

That's not to say neither argument is backed by logic. On some level there is substance behind the idea that crime would be much lower if either everybody or nobody had a weapon. Realistically speaking, however, most people can't handle a weapon in a fight much less their own hands, and getting rid of guns in a culture that has grown up alongside them and has them smuggled in every day is just not feasible.

Let's get this part out of the way. I like guns. Growing up in Georgia with a card-carrying NRA member father, I grew up to enjoy the skill it takes to strike a minuscule target with a piece of lead smaller than the diameter of your pointer finger. I also have many friends who feel the same way. As a former Atlanta police officer, I got formally trained in how to better adjust my trigger pull to hit a human-sized target out at 25 yards.

However, I'm no pro shooter; I'm just a hobbyist, albeit with more training than most, and I don't believe everybody on Earth should have a gun, but those that show that they're capable, both mentally and physically, ought to have the right to carry in a wider variety of places than most laws allow, but this isn't the part where I ostracize liberals or conservatives with my point of view.

Yes, guns take lives. Guns, by their very nature, are meant to destroy. In the wrong hands, a firearm may be used in the commission of a forcible felony or a shot could take an innocent life. Likewise, a gun could be used to stop a forcible felony, thereby possibly saving lives, as well. Laws prohibiting gun ownership do not stop criminals; by their very nature, criminals operate in apathy of a law at the least, and in sheer hatred of it at the most.

Therein lies the dilemma. I'm not quite sure adding more gun laws would do much, especially if they're of the same principles as the current ones, but then again, I'm not of the thought process that taking laws away would help, either.

So the question is, can there be balance between gun owners' rights and an increase in public safety?

I think there can be, but it takes some introspection and a willingness to release any dogmatic notions that come with near-absolute views. It takes skill to be able to handle yourself in a combative situation, but training is only a piece of the puzzle. The rest of it revolves around the benefits and negatives of guns in our culture and the history of how we came to establish Second Amendment rights in the first place.

In order to get a better grasp on the situation, I believe it best that we go back to the beginning. No, not the beginning of the court's decision making process. Not even to the last civilian shooting, or even the last officer-involved one. It'll be best to go back to the point when this country was a series of British colonies.