I support the Second Amendment, not because I am a gun fancier or NRA member - I am neither - but because it is an integral part of the Bill of Rights. In my own view, the guarantee to citizens to keep and bear arms is a relic of the 18th Century, appropriate, perhaps even necessary, at a time when the scope and future power of the fledgling federal government were still undetermined. Under those circumstances, it was perhaps wise to ensure that citizens could own firearms for two reasons: first, because there was no federal army, and so the ability to muster militias at short notice (minutemen as they were called), was essential to the national defense; and second, as a final resort of the citizens if the new and evolving federal authority became too oppressive.
In our time, neither of these reasons remains valid. We have a national army, quite a large and powerful one, and, given that, no matter how far the federal authority overreaches, citizens would be helpless to retaliate against it with force. And so, to my mind, the twin rationale for retaining the right to bear arms is academic, a matter for historical scrutiny, not contemporary ardor.
Nonetheless, I support the Second Amendment because, as one of the ten articles of the original Constitution, it represents a foundation stone of our republic, and we weaken it or remove it at our peril. As I listen to the never-ending debate over gun control, I find myself wishing that the anti-gun advocates would simply be honest and declare their desire to repeal the amendment, making gun ownership a crime. That, at least, I could respect for its frankness if not for its foresight. Perhaps we ought to have a national referendum on the question of repeal, and decide once and for all whether the right to own firearms ought to remain enshrined in the Constitution, or be removed from it. If the vote for repeal is indisputable, then the Constitutionally mandated process should begin. Instead, the fruitless arguments continue, as do the mass shootings, and nothing gets done.
There are many people in this country who do not like the Second Amendment and its implications, and would wish to see it weakened to the point where it virtually ceases to exist. To them I say that there are people who dislike other amendments as well; for example, the Fifth, which protects citizens against self-incrimination by guaranteeing the right to refuse to testify, if doing so will inculpate them. I can recall hours and hours of testimony before Congressional committees by known gangsters who routinely invoked the Fifth, waving it smugly in the face of the federal authorities. There were, I am sure, many who wished that the Fifth Amendment could be reduced to ashes or repealed altogether in order to force those monsters to tell the truth. But, as with the Second, retaining the Fifth serves, in the long run, to preserve the integrity of the Constitution itself, thus guaranteeing to all of us the rights envisioned by the Founders.
All that being said, the carnage in our nation has to stop. I do not for a moment believe that any act of Congress can accomplish this, but we can take reasonable steps to reduce the possibility and frequency of it. Even the most hardened NRA member must be shaken by the repeated spectacle of concert-goers running in terror for their lives, and students being forced to flee their classrooms with hands over their heads. Yet I expect that Congress, which Mark Twain called the great benevolent asylum for the helpless, will do nothing or next to nothing. So, what should be done?
I have heard it said repeatedly in the media that the common denominator in the mass shootings is assault weapons. This simply is not true - some involved them; and some, other kinds of weapons. The common denominator seems to be criminal insanity, or just pure evil. On the second point, there is nothing any government institution can do. On the first, the question of mental illness, there is much that can and must be done, but denoting what those steps would be is beyond my expertise.
However, it is undeniable that assault weapons have been used and will no doubt continue to be used by lunatics and demons, which makes it possible for anyone to concoct a remedy. There is no legitimate reason for any private citizen to own a military-style weapon. Period.
It does not matter whether you are a gun enthusiast, a sportsman, or a collector, military weapons should be reserved for the military. As should military-style magazines, military-style accessories, and military-style ammunition. All of these should be off-limits to private citizens, just as grenade launchers and plastic explosives are. Congress should, and by any measure of responsibility must, immediately ban the sale of such weapons to private citizens. And furthermore, given the glut of guns in our society, communities must take steps to encourage the surrender and destruction of them, as some have done in the past, and as other nations have done.
That background checks have consistently failed to prevent mass shootings has become evident, and something must be done to correct this situation. Surely, given the technology that enables the government to tap our phones and collect our emails and text messages, we can devise a system to monitor the profiles and personal histories of people who apply to buy guns. Anyone with a criminal record, a record of anti-social behavior, of violence, and of mental illness ought to be banned automatically and permanently from gun ownership.
Meanwhile, given the perennial ossification of Congress, much can be done on the state level. It makes no sense to enforce strict gun control laws in one state when criminals can merely cross the state line to purchase firearms in another. Surely, the governors can agree in conclave to harmonize their states' gun control laws so that, even in the absence of federal legislation, some uniformity and consensus may be achieved.
Short of divine intervention, evil cannot be stopped, but there are steps any rational society can and must take to curb the wanton violence that stalks our land. I have suggested some; there are doubtless many others which experts can devise. But no amount of compassion and no degree of expertise will have any effect unless those we have elected to represent and protect us take their responsibilities to heart, and put an end to this eternal political paralysis, which may serve their selfish professional interests, but which renders the rest of us vulnerable, and victims.
