The Lair
Back to Articles and Musings
The second amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America addresses the right to bear arms. It is the crux of heated discussions, which are perhaps better termed ‘arguments’, between many parties- for example and most prominently, the National Rifle Association and anti-gun activists. Any person running in an election for a political office must dance delicate steps around the issue, wary of offending the public, the corporations and in some cases the world. We all know what the second amendment says. Some are a little unclear as to what it means, but this is beyond the point. Behind all of this wrangling of words, behind the cyclic exchanges of insults- some subtle and some perilously brazen- is a general feeling that applies to all: people don’t like crime. Even if someone is associated with and in support of the NRA, they’re not likely to appreciate a gunman rampaging through their neighborhood. The issue at stake is how to deal with it.
When a person takes a gun, slaughters ten children at a day care center and permanently cripples eight others, it is the natural human reaction to be outraged. We are emotional beings, and driven by our feelings of disgust and grief and anger, we lash out at what is in our direct line of sight- guns. But in doing so, despite all our good intentions, we metaphorically grab a shovel and start enthusiastically digging our own graves. We allow ourselves to be blinded to what we are actually doing. Gun laws are theoretically the perfect solution, the noble cause of the righteous- but in practice they are ultimately idealistic, and the results they are in place to achieve are utterly unattainable via those methods.
There is an invisible but unbreakable cause and effect reaction between outlawed guns and armed crime. When we ban guns, armed crime increases- and not just a little, it explodes. This, of course, is entirely the opposite outcome to that which gun laws are intended to attain. The next logical question is why? What is the connection between these two factors, and what can we do to alter the equation in our favor?
When a gun restriction law is enacted, guns are confiscated and destroyed by the thousands. Who turns those guns in? Citizens who choose to be answerable to the law. But do armed thieves listen to the law? Do serial murderers listen to the law? When a gun restriction law is enacted, it is comparable to a large flashing billboard proclaiming ‘easy targets here, easy pickings, come get what you want’. It is keenly apparent that laws affect the ‘madmen’ who periodically conduct bloodbath massacres not at all. If a suicidal someone seeks to kill a group of people, they will inevitably find a way to do it. They will either locate guns, which are obtainable to the determined, or they can resort to other methods- chemical bombs, for example, which are simple for any mildly ambitious person to make.
If the question is how to stop madmen from butchering innocent people who just happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, clearly the answer is not a restriction of guns. The weapon is an instrument. Certainly it is a deadly instrument, and a dangerous one, but by concentrating all our efforts against it, we are missing the real culprit- and so the killings will continue. Prevention is, has been and always will be the best cure. Our enemy is ambiguous, elusive and mendacious, which is why so few have taken the time to identify it. It’s human behavior- and it’s not just the behavior of the criminals. The entire American justice system, shaped by the beliefs and behaviors of people who cry, for instance, that the death sentence is inhuman and unfair, is in part unquestionably responsible. We teach our children that what they do does not affect what happens to them; when a criminal is arrested and proven guilty, we give him fine cuisine and cable TV.
We call for gun restrictions, which causes a proliferation in crime, and then we dither when it comes to the punishment of that crime. It is a vicious, relentless cycle and we persist in floundering in it. What message are we sending to our children? What message are we sending to lawbreakers and to potential lawbreakers? Yet it is far more direct to claim that guns, as one of many instruments in crime and killing, are the problem. Guns present an instant and unmoving target, something we can straight away act against and feel good about ourselves for doing so. We wish to feel virtuous and merciful, and we are indignant at the very idea that our valiant intentions are the very cause of our quandary.
There is another, far more sinister and cunning threat, the ominously silent presence of which has been overlooked, ignored, denied or even overtly advocated. This once again refers to the Constitution and the infringement upon American rights and liberties. This is no shadowy, paranoid ‘conspiracy theory’- it exists blatantly, right in front of us. Presidential candidate Al Gore himself is a party to it. It is a maneuver of admirably magnificent manipulation of the American people, and it is one of many steps towards a future in which the rights and liberties of the American people are restricted to the point that, even in the most deluded of minds, we cannot be labeled a ‘society of liberty’. We will no longer be America. Gun laws are wholly alarming, or should be, to anyone who believes themselves to be free, egalitarian, democratic, individualistic and opposed to social oppression. There is a way that we can ensure full eradication of all criminal activities among the populace; there is a way that we can bring these killings down to zero- if we engage in a socialist and, by way of evolution, communist belief. This is the treacherous road America, led by vile people with vile intent, has already unknowingly started down. The recognition of this threat to America has not been acknowledged simply because it is so subtle, because it is already firmly entrenched in American minds and hearts.
By announcing and supporting a free society, we accept the ‘human factor’. We will always have people who commit crimes and think themselves above the law. This is not such a terrible price when in return we receive the benefits of a free economy, a competitive society and a policy of equality. Take the idea, severed from any connecting ties- our right to own a gun is being taken away. That we are even contemplating such laws speaks vociferously of how far America has strayed down Hayek’s Road to Serfdom.
The second amendment has been so horribly warped to fit so many people’s contradictory approaches to this problem that it is now disfigured beyond recognition. Many people are not even sure which side of the battle they’re fighting on- or if they are, they haven’t yet figured out why. This issue is legendary for its gray areas, which is of course why it is so intensely debated. There are guns that have no business being on the streets- assault weapons coming immediately to mind.
But in our wrath against the perpetrators of these crimes, in our sorrow for the victims, in our fear for our loved ones and ourselves, it is absolutely imperative that we adopt extreme caution when we consider this highly chaotic dispute. If our objective is to lower the frequency of these death-to-all incidents as well as their potency, and in the eyes of the optimistic to stop them altogether; if our objective is to maintain the doctrine of freedom that America has for so long prided herself on respecting; if, most immediately, we look at those we love and cannot bear the thought of a gun being pointed at them, then we have to realize it is not so straightforward that we can outlaw guns and believe we have cured the cancer. The path to achieving those goals is rocky; it’s going to be arduous, it’s going to be slippery, and it’s uphill all the way. But if we follow the easier path- namely, if we continue to ignore the consequences, both short and long-term, of our actions when we cry for gun restrictions- we will find ourselves sprawled in the muck at the bottom of the mountain whereas we could have been standing triumphant at the top.
