2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: Why cant the US try some of the gun control laws that most developed countries have tried [View all]HassleCat
(6,409 posts)Our constitution is very bold in that it extends an extremely dangerous right to almost every citizen. We pretty much guarantee all citizens the unfettered right to own as many ordinary small arms as they want. Originally, we did this so the citizenry could organize itself to fight off the King when he came back to reclaim his colonies. And he did exactly that, reinforcing the idea that we all had to be armed and ready. Of course, armed citizens help chase the Indians off the plains, enforce Jim Crow laws, shoot down some criminals, etc. Some of these things were not things we are proud of today, but they reinforced our love of firearms. Our courts ignore the "well regulated" language and rule that all citizens are part of the unorganized militia, and therefore have an unqualified constitutional right to own firearms without the government even knowing how many and what kind they have, let alone putting any restrictions in the way of getting them.
Personally, I feel the situation is backward. If I were to bestow such a potentially dangerous right on someone, I would give it to you guys up there, where you still seem to have some notion of civic responsibility and duty to your fellow citizens. But those very traits make you hesitant to allow everyone to own guns. Here, we are more self-centered, more individualistic, more fearful of our government and our fellow citizens, so many of us feel we need guns to preserve our freedoms. Perhaps this is because so many of us have so little regard for each other and our freedoms that we cannot conceive of acting in concert to look out for the rights and freedoms of our neighbors. I don't know. I do know the right to keep an bear arms is an extremely liberal freedom, and we are proving ourselves not worthy of it.