11. The Right to Bear Arms - 攜帶武器的權利
THE SECOND AMENDMENT IS clear to me: “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.”
第二次修正是明確的對我說：“一個紀律嚴明的民兵，是必要的自由州的安全，人民有權持有和攜帶武器，不得侵犯。”
Period.
期。
The fact that the Founding Fathers made it the Second Amendment, second only to our First Amendment freedoms of speech, religion, the press, and the right of assembly and to petition the government, shows that they understood how important the right to bear arms would be for all Americans.
該開國元勳使得它的第二次修訂，僅次於我們的言論，宗教，新聞，集會和向政府請願的權利，憲法第一修正案自由的事實，表明他們知道如何重要，攜帶武器的權利會對於所有美國人。
James Madison pointed out that this right was a unique historical protection when he said that the Constitution preserves “the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation . . . [where] the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.”
詹姆斯·麥迪遜指出，這權利是一項獨特的歷史保護時，他說，憲法保留了“被武裝優勢，這美國人擁有超過幾乎所有其他國家的人民。 。 。 [如果]各國政府都不敢帶武器信任的人。“
I own guns. Fortunately, I have never had to use them, but, believe me, I feel a lot safer knowing that they are there.
我擁有槍支。幸運的是，我從來沒有使用它們，但請相信我，我覺得安全很多知道他們的存在。
I also have a concealed-carry permit that allows me to carry a concealed weapon.
我也有一個隱蔽攜帶證，讓我隨身攜帶隱藏的武器。
I took the time and the effort to get that permit because the constitutional right to defend yourself doesn’t stop at the end of your driveway. That doesn’t apply just to me either. It applies to all our driveways or front doors.
我花了時間和精力來獲取許可證，因為捍衛自己的憲法權利並不在你的車道盡頭停下來。這不只是要么適用於我。它適用於我們所有的車道或前門。
That’s why I’m very much in favor of making all concealed-carry permits valid in every state.
這就是為什麼我主張讓所有隱蔽攜帶許可證在每一個國家有效的是非常多。
Every state has its own driving test that residents have to pass before becoming licensed to drive. Those tests are different in many states, but once a state licenses you to drive, every other state recognizes that license as valid.
每個國家都有自己的駕駛測試，居民必須成為持牌開車前通過。這些測試是在許多國家不同，但是一旦一個國家的許可，你開車，其他所有國家承認的許可證有效。
If we can do that for driving—which is a privilege, not a right—then surely we can do that for concealed carry, which is a right, not a privilege. That seems logical to me.
如果我們能做到這一點的驅動，這是一種特權，而不是一種權利，那麼我們肯定能做到這一點隱蔽攜帶，這是一種權利，而不是一種特權。這似乎是合乎邏輯的我。
The Second Amendment has been under attack for a long time. Throughout the years, state governments have chipped away at it, adding restrictions. No other right in the Bill of Rights has been attacked as often as the Second Amendment. Some of these restrictions obviously make sense. For example, felons and mentally ill people should not have access to guns.
第二次修訂已經受到攻擊了很長時間。這些年來，州政府已經在它鑿去，增加限制。在人權法案沒有其他權利已被經常攻擊為第二次修訂。有些顯然這些限制意義。對於例如，重罪犯和精神病人不應該獲得槍支。
A purpose of a gun among other things is to offer protection, to warn those people who would try to harm us that we are carrying a weapon and that we will use it.
除其他事項外槍的目的是提供保護，以警告那些人誰也試圖傷害我們，我們都攜帶了武器，我們將使用它。
In order to protect the Second Amendment, there are several significant steps we need to take. Most important, we need to start getting serious about prosecuting violent criminals. Sometimes it looks to me like the Obama administration has made only a token effort to take violent offenders off our streets.
為了保護憲法第二修正案，有我們需要採取一些顯著步驟。最重要的是，我們需要開始越來越重視起訴暴力罪犯。有時，在我看來像歐巴馬政府僅僅取得了象徵性的努力，採取暴力罪犯關我們的街道。
The problem is compounded by the pressure being put on police departments by community organizations who seek to make our police do their jobs with one hand tied behind their backs.
由壓力加劇的問題，通過社區組織誰尋求使我們的警察做自己的工作，用一隻手反綁被提上警察局。
Violent crime in our inner cities is out of control. Murder rates are way up. There are far too many hardened drug dealers and gang members who are repeatedly involved in burglaries and drive-by killings. We need to get them off the streets so that they don’t continue to terrorize their neighborhoods and ruin more lives.
在我們的內心城市暴力犯罪失控。謀殺率是一路上揚。有太多太多的硬化毒販和幫派成員誰是多次參與盜竊和偷渡式的殺戮。我們需要讓他們離開街頭，讓他們不要繼續恐嚇他們的街區，破壞更多的生命。
Here’s an example of what can work. In 1997, a program called Project Exile was started in Richmond, Virginia. It mandated that if a criminal was caught committing a crime with a gun, he had to be tried in federal court rather than city or state court. If convicted, there was a mandatory minimum sentence of five years in a federal prison without a chance of parole or early release.
這兒是可以工作的例子。 1997年，一個名為Project流放程序弗吉尼亞州里士滿開始。它規定，如果犯罪被抓獲犯持槍犯罪的，他曾在聯邦法院，而不是城市或州法院受審。如果罪名成立，有在一所聯邦監獄五年強制最低刑期不得假釋或提前釋放的機會。
This was such a sensible program that it was supported by both the NRA and the Brady Campaign, sponsors of the Brady Bill, which had fought for restricted gun ownership.
這是它是由支持這樣一個通情達理的程序都NRA和布雷迪運動，布雷迪法案，已受限擁有槍支打的贊助商。
The Project Exile program was enacted and it worked. This message was posted on billboards around the city: “An Illegal Gun Gets You Five Years in Federal Prison.” In the first year, homicides and armed robberies declined by about a third, and 350 armed criminals were taken off the streets.
項目計劃流放頒布和它的工作。此消息被張貼在城市周圍的廣告牌：“非法槍讓你在聯邦監獄五”的第一年，殺人和持械搶劫下降了約三分之一，並採取了350武裝歹徒街頭。
A decade later, when the primary elements of the program had been supplemented by a somewhat less tough state law, the number of homicides in Richmond had still been cut by more than half.
十年後，當計劃的主要內容是由一個不那麼艱難的州法為輔，里士滿殺人的人數仍削減了一半以上。
Why is this important to law-abiding gun owners? First of all, it offers an intelligent approach to reducing crime, something we all want. Second, it clearly shows that guns are not the problem—dangerous, unstable criminals are the problem.
為什麼這對守法持槍者重要？首先，它提供了一個聰明的辦法，以減少犯罪，是我們都想要。其次，它清楚地表明，槍支是沒有問題的，危險的，不穩定的罪犯的問題。
The antigun lobby still seems to be confused about this distinction.
該antigun大堂似乎仍然被混淆這種區別。
We don’t need to keep guns out of the hands of law-abiding citizens. We need to crack down harder on the career criminals who traffic in guns illegally. Programs like Project Exile will help make our communities safer.
我們不需要保持槍出守法公民手中。我們必須嚴厲打擊職業罪犯的槍支誰非法的交通困難。像項目流放計劃將幫助使我們的社區更加安全。
Another important way to fight crime is to create an environment where our law enforcement officers are appreciated for all the good work they do as opposed to being singled out and criticized for the few bad officers who give police a bad name. I realize—and deeply regret—those situations where a police officer acted poorly under pressure and used unnecessary force.
打擊犯罪的另一個重要途徑是營造一個讓執法人員都讚賞他們做的，而不是被挑出來批評了幾個壞官誰給警方的名聲良好的工作環境。我認識和深感遺憾，那些一名警察在壓力下採取行動不佳和使用不必要的武力的情況。
Let’s be clear about one thing: Our police do an amazing job in dealing with all the potentially explosive situations they face on a daily basis. We know, for example, that most crime is committed locally, within a neighborhood or even a household, where an argument can escalate into violent anger and action.
讓我們清楚一件事：我們的警察在處理所有他們每天都在面對潛在的爆炸性局勢做一個了不起的工作。我們知道，例如，大多數犯罪本地提交，一個社區，甚至一個家庭，其中一個參數可能會升級為暴力的憤怒和行動中。
Who gets called into these situations? The police, of course. It is their job to rush in and calm things down. They are protecting neighborhood residents from the criminals in their midst. Detectives have to pick up the pieces when a robbery or murder occurs, so that the perpetrators of crimes can be brought to justice. Our law enforcement officers are very professional and well trained.
誰被調用到這些情況呢？警察，當然。這是他們的工作和平靜的東西趕在了下來。他們是在他們中間保護鄰里街坊從罪犯。偵探有當搶劫或謀殺發生時收拾殘局，讓罪犯可以被繩之以法。我們的執法人員都非常專業和訓練有素。
Ultimately, protecting ourselves and our families is our own responsibility. I know that. We have to be alert and report suspicious strangers or packages. We have to create community boards that can work in tandem, not in “gotcha mode,” when dealing with local authorities. As relatives and friends, we have to be vigilant when someone close to us is suddenly showing deep signs of depression or erratic behavior while posting threats on social networks.
歸根結底，保護我們自己和我們的家庭是我們自己的責任。我知道。我們必須要警惕，並報告可疑陌生人或包。我們必須創建社區委員會，可以串聯與地方當局打交道時的工作，而不是在“疑難雜症模式”。由於親戚和朋友，我們必須保持警覺，當有人接近我們突然呈現，同時發布在社交網絡的威脅抑鬱或反常行為的深刻痕跡。
We also have the right to protect ourselves with gun ownership. It’s as fundamental as choosing our type of religious worship or allowing the press to be critical of our government.
我們也有保護自己與槍所有權。這是因為我們選擇宗教崇拜的類型或允許新聞是我們批評政府為根本。
What is foolish and unnecessary is the media criticism that immediately ties a well-publicized crime to the gun rather than to the criminal.
什麼是愚蠢的，沒有必要被媒體批評說， 立即系上廣為人知的犯罪槍，而不是罪犯。
There are a number of steps that can be taken that will benefit all Americans, including the millions of law-abiding gun owners as well as those people who believe wrongly that guns are the source of our crime problems.
還有一些可以採取這將有利於所有美國人，包括數以百萬計的守法持槍者以及那些誰相信錯誤地認為槍是我們的犯罪問題的根源，人們步驟。
We have to keep guns out of the hands of people with mental health issues. The fact that people with mental health problems can obtain guns is not right. We all agree about that and we have to stop it, but there are some big hurdles.
我們必須保持槍出來的人有心理健康問題的手中。人們有心理健康問題都可以獲取槍支的事實是不正確的。我們都同意有關，我們必須阻止它，但也有一些大的障礙。
Let’s deal with reality: Our mental health system is broken, and it needs to be fixed. Politicians have ignored this issue because it is such a complex problem, and it might cost some big money.
讓我們面對現實：我們的精神健康系統壞了，它需要修復。政治家們忽略了這個問題，因為它是一個複雜的問題，它可能會花費一些大的錢。
But the fact is we need to fix this problem now.
但事實是，我們現在需要解決這個問題。
Many of the mass murders that have taken place in this country over the last several years have one glaring fact in common: There were red flags that were ignored, and warning signs about the future “murderers” that were ignored. Parents and close friends, even Facebook friends, chose not to say anything or to look the other way. Denial is not responsible behavior.
許多在過去的幾年裡發生在這個國家的大屠殺中有一個共同的明顯的事實：有被忽略的紅旗，和警示標誌關於被忽視，未來的“兇手”。父母和親密的朋友，甚至是Facebook上的朋友，選擇不說什麼，或者尋找其他方式。否認是不負責的行為。
Most people with mental health problems aren’t violent; they just need help. We have to invest the money and resources to expand treatment programs that can provide that help. But there are people who are violent. They are a danger to the community and they are a danger to themselves.
大多數人心理健康問題不是暴力;他們只是需要幫助。我們必須投入資金和資源，擴大治療方案，可以提供幫助。但有些人誰是暴力。他們是對社會構成威脅，他們對自己的危險。
There are people who should be institutionalized and not living on the streets. Judges say they are entitled to their rights, which of course is true. They are entitled up to the point when they become dangerous to others and themselves. Then the situation changes. Then we have to protect the rights of young children going innocently to school or families out for a relaxing evening at a movie.
還有誰應該制度化，而不是人流落街頭。法官說，他們有權自己的權利，這當然是真的。他們有權到該點時，他們變得危險他人和自己。那麼情況就會改變。然後，我們要保護年幼的孩子一個電影傻傻地上學或家庭出一個輕鬆的晚上的權利。
Why is this important to law-abiding gun owners? Because you are the citizens the antigun movement and the media blame when a deranged madman uses a gun to commit a horrific act. When one of these tragedies occurs, you can be sure two things are going to follow. First, opponents of gun rights will immediately exploit the situation to push their antigun agenda, and second, none of their proposed restrictions would have prevented the tragedy from taking place.
為什麼這對守法持槍者重要？因為你是公民antigun運動和媒體的指責時，一個精神錯亂的瘋子使用槍犯下可怕的行為。當這些悲劇之一發生時，可以確保兩件事情要遵循。首先，持槍權的對手將立即利用情況來推動他們的議程antigun，二，沒有他們提出的限制會阻止悲劇的發生。
We need real solutions to solve real problems. We don’t need advocates of useless gun restrictions taking advantage of emotional situations to push their agenda.
我們需要真正的解決方案，以解決實際問題。我們不需要沒用的槍限制服用情緒化的情況的優勢，推動他們的議程的倡導者。
So how can we protect and extend the rights of law-abiding gun owners? We accomplish that by educating all Americans about the facts. For example, there has been a long and expensive campaign to find different ways to ban guns or gun hardware. In effect, just get rid of guns. That’s the answer gun control advocates give.
那麼，如何才能保護和延長的守法持槍者的權利？我們實現這個目標通過教育所有美國人了解事實。例如，出現了一個漫長而昂貴的運動，以找到不同的方法來禁止槍或槍的硬件。實際上，剛剛擺脫槍。這就是答案槍支管制的倡導者放棄。
This tactic is a road to nowhere.
這個戰術是無處路。
Opponents of gun rights often use a lot of scary descriptive phrases when proposing legislative action against various types of weapons. Ban “assault weapons” they say, or “military-style weapons,” or “high-capacity magazines.”
的持槍權反對者提出對各類武器的立法行動時，往往使用大量可怕的描述性短語。班固“攻擊性武器”，他們說，還是“軍用武器”或“高容量的雜誌。”
這些都做聽起來有點不祥，直到你明白他們實際上是在談論是常見的，流行的半自動步槍，並且是擁有和數以千萬計的美國人使用的標準的雜誌。
I worry when our social-policy makers, looking for a “cause,” pick on guns. The Supreme Court has made it clear that the government simply has no business and, in fact, no right to dictate to gun owners what types of firearms law-abiding Americans are allowed to own. Gun owners should be allowed to purchase the best type of weapon for their needs, whether it’s for self-protection, sport shooting, or any other purpose.
我擔心當我們的社會政策制定者，尋找“病因”，挑槍。最高法院已經明確表示，政府根本沒有業務，事實上，沒有權利支配槍支所有者什麼類型的槍支守法的美國人被允許自己。持槍者應該被允許購買武器的最佳類型為他們的需求，無論是出於自我保護，射擊比賽，或任何其他目的。
There has been a lot of speculation about background checks, as if researching the background of everyone attempting to legally purchase a gun will somehow keep guns out of the hands of criminals. The national background-check system has been in place since 1998. Every time a gun is purchased from a federally licensed gun dealer, which is how the overwhelming majority of all gun purchases take place, they have to go through a federal background check.
已經有很多關於背景調查的猜測，因為如果大家研究試圖合法購買槍支會勉強保持了槍支犯罪分子手中的背景。自1998年以來國家背景檢查系統已經到位每次槍是由聯邦政府授權經銷商的槍，這是絕大多數都是槍採購如何進行購買的，他們必須要經過聯邦背景檢查。
Unfortunately, as expected, bringing more government regulation into the situation has accomplished very little. The main “benefit” has been to make it difficult for a law-abiding American to buy a gun. As study after study has proven, few criminals are stupid enough to try to pass a background check or have their names in any kind of system.
不幸的是，正如所料，帶來了更多的政府監管入情已經完成了非常小的。主要的“利益”一直難以對守法的美國買槍。隨著一次又一次的研究已經證明，一些犯罪分子愚蠢到試圖通過背景檢查或有他們的名字在任何類型的系統。
So they get their guns the same way bad guys have always gotten their guns—by stealing them or by buying them from an unlicensed source or getting them from family and friends.
因此，他們得到他們的槍以同樣的方式壞人總是被槍竊取或者向無牌來源購買他們或家人和朋友讓他們得到他們。
This system is another example of federal regulation that has turned into a complete failure. When the system was put in place, gun owners were promised it would be instant, accurate, and fair. That isn’t what has happened at all.
該系統是一個聯邦監管的另一個例子已經變成了一個徹底的失敗。當系統已經到位，持槍者被承諾這將是即時，準確，公正的。那是不是發生了什麼事都沒有。
One final caveat. We need to allow our military members to carry firearms on bases and at recruiting centers. As we have seen, our current policies leave our military members—and their families—defenseless on their own bases. They can be sitting ducks for one crazy person with a machine gun.
最後一個警告。我們需要讓我們的軍事人員進行基地，並在招募中心槍支。正如我們所看到的，我們目前的政策，我們的軍人和他們的家屬離開，手無寸鐵對自己的基地。它們可以活靶子一個瘋狂的人用機槍。
In the end, we must understand and appreciate why the right to keep and bear arms is so essential for law-abiding citizens. And we must recognize that the red tape proposed to infringe upon that right is a tremendous waste and possible danger to us all. My sons Donald and Eric are members of the NRA—and so am I—and proud of it!
最後，我們必須了解和明白為什麼擁有和攜帶武器的權利是守法的公民如此重要。我們必須認識到，紅頭文件提出侵犯這種權利是一種極大的浪費和可能危及我們所有人。我的兒子唐納德和艾瑞克是成員NRA，所以我是和自豪吧！