Trusting Government

The current public debate over gun ownership pits supporters of the 2^nd Amendment of the Constitution with those who feel the 2^nd Amendment needs some softening in its effects and outcomes.

Once again, outcome is the focus of the discussion but 2^nd Amendment purists turn the conversation to that dimension only. The rest of the conversation resembles a cat fight. Expertise of one thing or another is used as a trump against someone’s lesser knowledge on the same points. But that is noise. Whether intended or not, it deflects the conversation away from some important key elements of the discussion:

1.     Intent and purpose of the 2^nd Amendment

2.     Enormous gun death statistics; annual results

3.     Trust in government

I am not a lawyer nor am I a gun owner or member of the National Rifle Association. I still have an opinion, however, and in America that gives me the right to use my voice to express that opinion.

The 2^nd Amendment elementally allows citizens to own and bear arms. In those days, there were no standing armies and citizens constituted what was hoped to be a ready militia to help defend the nation. Later, military forces were provided for and the need for citizens to be able and ready to form a militia became unnecessary. Laws were changed to reflect this, but then so were many other laws written that muddied the waters considerably. Now an army of lawyers (hopefully unarmed) are needed to parse the legal jargon well enough for courts to decide the core issues.

Still, I support the 2^nd Amendment. If a person wants to own a gun, they should be able to own one or many and pursue their interests accordingly. That is their right. I will forgo this right in my own life. I do not wish to own guns or bear them in anyway.

What I do wish to help with is reducing the number of gun fatalities in America. After proper research of these statistics, I would hope we would have a better understanding on how many of these fatalities could have been avoided with common sense gun restrictions/regulations. How can we accommodate both the gun owner’s rights while reducing the death count? Which specialized experts in our land are capable of handling this matter so we all understand what the consequences are if we attempt to fix the problems? I want those people to help us do the heavy lifting of understanding the problem, identifying potential solutions, and finding a good balance of those solutions to apply to the problem. Then I’d like a proposal to be offered for public study so a consensus among citizens can be acquired. This will be a slow process, but it will be an honest one built on knowledge.

Being a supporter of the 2^nd Amendment, I do not want an authoritarian government to confiscate all the guns. I just want some of the weaponry removed from the hands of citizens that are more properly appropriate for law enforcement or military personnel.

That position, however, assumes my trust in government in the first place. Yes; I do trust government. It is not perfect and it can be skewed by poor judgment and bad leadership. An intelligent and involved citizenry is the foil to bad government. Government needs, especially a democracy, a public that is willing to get involved and be knowledgeable about government affairs. That is what guarantees our government to be of, by and for the people. Anything less allows government to fall into dangerous hands.

I do not believe the American people need to own guns to protect themselves from their own government. That is my bedrock. Because other societies allowed huge government distortions of power, does not mean that can happen in America.

Ours is a culture of the ballot box, not of armed homes. Ours is a culture of peace and cool minds.

Current public discussion is often skewed toward the obscene and stupid. More calm and clear headedness is needed to do justice with our public debate on all issues. That includes trust in government and the 2^nd Amendment limitations.

I hope we can get to a better place in those discussions soon before families split apart on such ideological themes.

March 28, 2018