I am a 27-year veteran. I was never wounded by enemy action, nor did I ever provide direct lifesaving aid to someone who was wounded. I was decorated for my professional acumen, not my bravery.
Yet my vote counts as much as that of a man who wears the Purple and the Bronze Star, or that of a man who wears the Medal of Honor. His opinion is exactly as valid as mine. We took the same oath.
The RKBA is part of the Constitution, which all military members swear an oath to support and defend. However, there is no stipulation that a member must testify to agreement with every word of the document. None are asked to disclose what specific parts of the document they personally love or loathe. They pledge loyalty to all of it.
It's a lot getting married, vowing to love, honor, etc. that other person, but not promising to like the color she chooses for the dining room walls or the way he leaves his boots by the doorway. We pledge love and support, not complete agreement.
Giving any person a pass on his or her desire to strip away our RKBA is the same as giving a pass on a person's desire to strip away any other Constitutionally protected right. How many of us grant a pass on censorship, or unwarranted invasions of privacy? (Well, that too is changing.)
The drafters and ratifiers of the Constitution knew there would be challenges to the specifics of the document as technology and culture evolved, and they provided a mechanism for those evolutions to be expressed: the Amendment process. It works; we have used it 27 times.
The RKBA (save in cases of suspension by due process, which is another hotly debated issue and not relevant here) is and must be a protected right until such time as it is stricken or modified by Amendment. No individual, no legislature, no court has legitimate power to change that. No other process is valid. That is why the oath is so vitally important and why it doesn't include a vow to support and defend case law, legal precedent, or bench legislation.
Every person may choose not to own a gun and to argue adamantly against the RKBA; the Constitution codifies that. I support a person's right to whatever the document says he can do.
However, I grant no pass to anyone who seeks to nullify my rights or invalidate any part of the Constitution. I do support the amendment process; let those who seek to curtail the RKBA use that process and only that process to achieve their aim. If their long-held position were that of most people and most legislatures, then drafting, passing, and ratifying an anti-RKBA Amendment would have already happened. It has not.
