17th Century: The pilgrims fled persecution in the United Kingdom so that they could have the freedom to persecute the indigenous people of a new land.17-19th Centuries: These “Americans” trafficked in African people so that they could build great homes and cities, including the vaunted Capitol Building in Washington, D.C.19th Century: The complete eradication of all 562 Native Americans tribes – as many as 17 million indigenous people – was all but complete. 20th Century: Civil rights leader Martin Luther King was assassinated when he challenged the insidious practice of economic racism, common throughout the country.
As much as the people of the United States might like to focus on their guns, let’s not forget that chemical weapons are also part of an historic past. Smallpox-infected blankets were given to Native Americans as part of a virtual genocide in the 18th century. The U.S. government is also known to have used chemical weapons in World War I, developed a biological weapons project under Franklin D Roosevelt and doused pretty much all of Vietnam with Agent Orange. And then of course there’s the use of nuclear weapons.
And so…what if the United States government had decided that chemical weapons were worth the amendment, and not guns, in 1791? A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear chemical weapons shall not be infringed. Is this what they would be fighting for now? Would it be the National Chemical Weapons Associations (NCWA) rather than the National Rifle Association (NRA)? Would mentally crazed individuals be running through campuses spraying nerve gas? Would so many others be collecting various strains and keep them loosely locked in bedroom closets? And would the U.S. government send aid to Syria, in the form of canisters, when people were killed by gunfire instead?