Gun Nation: The Cost of Arming The Citizenry

Americans imagine a simpler world, and then they make rules based on this imagination. Because the Constitution represents a time honored set of rules-with the added weight these rules are supposed to actually exist-Americans demand “their constitutional rights” and believe these rights will be given to them. Like any good movie this demands a suspension of disbelief-because the rich and powerful regularly escape the bounds of these rights, responsibilities, and (most importantly) the restrictions. Willful blindness is a necessity for belief in the sanctity of old documents. These creeds, drawn up in a different time, with different problems have to be “interpreted” to create relevance. But there is a consequence for depending on interpretation. First, anyone gaining the privilege of interpretation can see what he wants in the old words. But secondly, there are consequences to any decision; and there is no now that we have defended ‘our rights’ we can go home and sleep soundly knowing we have protected democracy. There is no happily ever after.
The second amendment of the constitution of the United States is in the news more often than other members of the Bill of Rights. The founding fathers are often cast as guaranteeing the right of every citizen to have a gun. This is a willful interpretation of their words and more importantly, a misinterpretation of their motives, even their psychology. A factor missing from modern analysis is the psychology of leaders of a small weak country, having won a war more by circumstance and reluctance on the opposition’s part, wrote a document reflecting the possibility the war of independence would not be the final war, and the next war might not have favorable circumstance-they could lose. With a possible loss, perhaps in the offing, they codified “rights” such as maintaining a militia-which would be acceptable to the British as a ‘keeping order’ efficiently in the hinterlands of the vast new nation. These militias would be key to another, further, war of independence. Codified rights would be less likely to be struck down. Efficient means of keeping order and protection for the expanding borders would appeal to the British. This was the greater reality of the 2nd Amendment. The founding fathers viewing the modern interpretation of their writings would be shocked and horrified. The loss of ruling power by the men with property would be terrifying. Every citizen armed-Never…
But it is the adherence to old documents and the psychology of the past that should give great pause. We honor the constitution because it gives a sense of order. Without this wall against circumstantial morality the country could veer in any direction and the country could be lost. A bill could be introduced to restrict and control an industry, only to be affected by lobbyist and rewritten to codify the demands for profit by that very industry(like the Cable Bill). So to maintain any illusion of control-we worship the constitution and feel this frees us from any consequence-as if the founding fathers were omniscient for all times and circumstances. Americans forget that any moment of crisis the first thing tossed are the constitutional rights of someone seen as less deserving. Lincoln, FDR, bush, all violated the rights of citizens and were allowed to do so because of the “good motive justification.” So the “Rights” so fervently believed in and used as a banner by so many-are simply canceled with some justification. Any rule or law that allows for excuse is a suggestion not a law-but this also is ignored.
But what if the Constitution is viewed as inviolable law? There are still consequences to every decision. What if the second amendment really meant for every American to have a gun? Is this a stable order for a country? There is an obvious price to pay for an armed citizenry. First problem is, there will have to be a large manufacturing industry to provide the guns. When the market is satisfied-every American has a gun