As I have demonstrated in my blogs throughout the years, social and political problems require remedy at the bottom of the issues. Cosmetic touches and surface modifications might help short-term but lead to further deterioration down the road.
The two carnages at El Paso, Texas, and Dayton, Ohio - both of which took place within 24 hours last weekend - and the expected short-sighted and factually flawed statements in the wake of it make it a moral duty to speak up.
I outlined the notions surrounding private gun ownership, gun violence, and 2nd Amendment issues in the U.S. in several blog entries. For the sad occasion of the San Bernadino massacre of December 2, 2015, see https://www.edwinseditorial.com/2015/12/guns-in-private-hands-what-to-do-with.html; on the Florida High School shooting of February 14, 2018, go to https://www.edwinseditorial.com/2018/03/amend-second-amendment.html. Aside from providing the normative criteria for private citizens' rights to bear arms in any open society, I addressed the particular challenges the U.S. faces concerning that issue.
The opposing parties on the issue are, for the most part, mistaken and have been barking up the wrong tree, as I will show further down. To lay the proper foundation for what follows, a citation from the 2018 essay above 'Amend the Second Amendment: "A gun itself – like a knife or a truck or a rock – is an inanimate object that carries no moral value whatsoever in and of itself. Only the human being using it gives it meaning and bestows ethical significance upon it. While proper legislation concerning gun ownership serves as a deterrent and certainly helps to contain potential abuse and to prevent crime, it is ultimately the human volition that decides how guns – or knives or trucks or rocks for that matter – are used."
Only instilling adequate regard for human life through proper socialization and education of young people can help overcome the potential pathological triggers for mass-shootings and murder sprees. To name a few of these triggers: self-indulgence, apathetic egotism, seemingly uncontrollable hatred, self-hatred, and lack of desensitization as to the ease of killing shown in video games and Hollywood movies.
The societal deficits as to this truly human dimension of the phenomenon are ubiquitous and virtually unmissable to the conscientious observer. Is this the inevitable price any society has to pay that praises lawlessness, celebrates moral relativism, surrenders the notions of truth and justice to the dictates of political correctness? The answer to this question seems to be as sure as the observation of the phenomenon is evident.
We arrived at the point where the issue of gun control enters the picture. As explained in more detail (again https://www.edwinseditorial.com/2015/12/guns-in-private-hands-what-to-do-with.html), legitimate and well-informed governments are aware that the right to self-defense and gun ownership, within clearly prescribed confines, fosters and consolidates the State's monopoly of force. Hence, both the monopoly of arms in conjunction with private gun ownership provides a synthesis for a nation's most efficient internal safety and security.
To overcome the confusion dominating the current gun debate in politics and society, an adaptation or revision of the Second Amendment stressing the law's self-defense component would appear conducive. Such clarification would also explain why no privately owned arms beyond handguns and weapons for immediate protection of one's safety and hunting purposes are needed. Dealing with the already purchased and privately owned assault weapons may require different measures, i.e., voluntary buyback or even confiscation of firearms in limited and justified circumstances of immediate endangerment. We know from the Florida incident that if law enforcement had followed through on that latter idea, the event most likely could have been prevented.
About this aspect, the gun lobbyists and the National Rifle Association (NRA) are undoubtedly wrong. In contrast, the Democrats and many others who demand a ban on military-style assault weapons are right. It should never happen in an open society that somebody commits a mass murder-shooting with a legally acquired AK-47. Such kinds of weapons have nothing lost in private hands. However, how to grant interested people access to handling and shooting such weapons in the controlled environment of gun and shooting clubs I have explained in the essay 'Amend the Second Amendment' (see link above). I also explained why the militia clause of the 2nd Amendment no longer applies to the same degree it did at the time of the inception of the republic.
The currently ongoing blame game in U.S. domestic politics is ridiculous. Neither can President Trump's rhetoric nor existent gun-laws be blamed for the mass shootings. The dubious psychological motivations for individuals to carry out these senseless acts of mass violence owe to the extremely polarized atmosphere of the domestic debate on crucial issues (such as immigration, the rule of law, etc.) and the sheer impossibility of civilized dialogue in an environment of fake news and hateful anti-Trumpism. As violence occurs ever more frequently at demonstrations and political rallies and the bearers of opposing views get bashed and destroyed, genuinely unhinged individuals seem to carry it to the extremes of mass shootings on rare occasions.
The fact that citizens can privately own military-style assault weapons legally in this country undoubtedly and positively contributes to the magnitude of those killings - although it doesn't cause them - and lays open a flaw in the interpretation and enforcement of the Second Amendment.
This here approach should allow politicians and lawmakers to find common ground on this critical issue. I have to underscore again that a modification of constitutions and constitutional amendments is possible. Like any other law, the Second Amendment can either be amended or further specified by meaningful legislation. In the case of the U.S. Constitution, standard specifications should underscore the right to self-defense and relate the extent to which people may privately own certain types of guns.
