As we continue in this 2016 election cycle, we are increasingly faced with polarizing issues which stir up controversy and force us to choose the candidate we think will best represent our beliefs as commander in chief. Of all of these issues which confront us however, perhaps none is so vehemently defended as gun control. This is an issue which forces people to the extremes and causes extraordinary levels of debate across the entire face of our society. However, the very amendment which gun lobbyists cling to could be the exact thing which will give us the answer. As with all laws, any laws regarding gun control must have basis in the constitution, and in this case from a very specific location.

December 15, 1791, the second amendment was adapted to the United States Constitution. The text of the document reads thus, "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".

Now the basis for the majority of gun debates is the cries of gun enthusiasts which scream out that "law abiding gun owners shouldn't be punished" and "registration is the step before confiscation" yet I contend that the vast majority of gun owners are not law abiding whatsoever. Many gun owners, fearing the government and retribution, build what are known as Ghost Guns, or weapons which are self assembled and thus not registered. it is this which causes the rest of the society including truly law abiding gun owners to scream. How does one claim to be defending the rights of law abiding citizens while creating illegal firearms in their own homes? Well many would cite this Second Amendment. They claim that the government is attempting to subjugate their rights and take away their firearms. Yet this is perfectly within the rights of the government to do.

The amendment, as above, states that "a well regulated militia" is necessary, this means that to own an unregistered weapon is by very definition not regulated and thus is in violation of the very amendment which enthusiasts constantly champion. the document also says the right to bear arms shall not be infringed. It does NOT say that a citizen may own any kind of firearm they desire it simply says they may bear arms, and this by definition allows the government to restrict the types of firearms so long as they do not disallow ownership of all. So long as even a single firearm is allowed to be owned by private citizens, then the spirit of the amendment is alive and well.

In summary, claiming that you shouldn't have to register your firearms or that the government shouldn't be regulating your guns, is a simply ridiculous argument which flies in the face of the Second Amendment. Secondly, the ownership of Ghost Guns, is an insult to gun owners everywhere and a direct challenge to the cause of gun ownership. those who own these weapons do not belief in the second amendment which calls for regulation, but instead they simply own the weapons out of some kind of sick pleasure they get from the ownership and use of dangerous and illegal firearms. If we are ever going to find a middle political ground on issue as controversial as this, we need to silence the extremists and come to a common ground based on the true meaning of the laws which govern us.