Ukraine keeps illustrating why Second Amendment matters

AP Photo/Andriy Dubchak

For more than a week now, much of the world has been fixated on Ukraine. After all, we’re watching Russia invade a neighbor and we’re watching that neighbor resist far better than almost anyone expected.

Why?

Well, part of that may be because the Ukrainian government was more than ready to hand out weapons.

Over at Reason, they put out a video worth watching:

In it, writer and narrator Noor Greene, says, “The threat of tyranny isn’t only present in the third world. In the United States, critics of the Second Amendment have claimed that in modern warfare, small-time weapons are useless as a check on the power of standing armies.”

The video continues to show footage of President Joe Biden making light of that claim, as if the Second Amendment is irrelevant, saying that to defend against tyranny you would need F-15s and nuclear weapons.

Yet, as we can see in Ukraine, that’s not necessarily the case.

After all, the much smaller military power isn’t losing ground like it should have.

The truth is that while you may not be able to win a conventional war without fighter jets and tanks, we’ve seen enough history over the last few years that should make anyone pause before claiming small arms have a minimal role in resisting a military power.

Between the Taliban in Afghanistan and the Ukrainians battling Russians, we’re seeing the underdogs can put up quite a fight.

See, having tanks is great, but people can’t stay inside those tanks indefinitely. Plus, tanks are bad for urban combat without infantry support. Guess who isn’t protected by a tank, though? That’s right, infantry support.

Oh, but you can just call in an airstrike? Sure.

But that pilot has to land at some point, making them far more vulnerable.

All of these things are likely part of the Ukrainian long-term strategy. It should also be part of the thinking when it comes to the Second Amendment.

Look, I pray we never end up in a civil war. If we do, it won’t be pleasant. It won’t be two sides in uniform obeying the traditional laws of war.

No, it’ll make the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq look like a nice summer vacation destination.

But what about down the road. Right now, the United States is a superpower, the last remaining one. Will that status quo remain unchanged? Will we always be too powerful to challenge?

See, it’s one thing to think about the here and now, but the Constitution was crafted for the future. Our Founding Fathers preserved certain rights in the Bill of Rights that they felt were essential to future generations. Yes, in part to resist a tyrannical government, but also to resist foreign invaders.

Much like Ukraine is doing right now.

What they’re dealing with is exactly what the Second Amendment is for. That’s why we have it and why other nations actually need something similar. Our rights don’t evaporate because someone decides there’s no pressing need for them any longer.

Our supposed leaders have forgotten that.