The broken record that is contemporary American life is once more playing funeral music for school kids killed by guns. This month Santa Fe High School in Texas has its turn, before that a school in Parkland, Fla., suffered, and next time it will be somewhere else, sure as night follows day unless we come to our senses.
Tragedy follows tragedy and the greatest tragedy is that no one can think straight to stop the deadly loop. Instead, that twisted definition of insanity — doing the same thing over and over expecting different results — is once more offered as the way forward.
Once more politicians offer their thoughts and prayers in lieu of action. Once more someone says it is too early for politics as their way of hastening the time when it too late for politics to be of any use.
In this moment of despair, when the choice appears to be between doing nothing, or doing something that foolishly poses as doing something, let me offer an irreverent thought that goes to the heart of the matter: Concerning all those thoughts and prayers for victims of gun violence, to what god are they addressed?
To the son of God who, about to be led away to His execution, stayed the hand of his chief apostle, told him to put away his sword (the gun of its day) and healed the man he struck? That God? It seems unlikely that God would look favorably on such prayers absent real efforts to address the core problem. Hypocritical prayers would be better sent to Mars or Thor.
The core problem is that a sizable number of Americans have made a golden calf to worship. But that graven image is not golden; it is made of shining gun metal. As long as the almighty gun is put on a pedestal in our culture, praising the Lord and passing the ammunition in the general context of our world only perpetuates the suffering.
So guns should be banned? No. That would never work and it would not even be desirable. Guns are too much in the DNA of this country to be put aside and free people should have the right to self-defense, especially in a vast land where law enforcement is stretched thin. The Second Amendment ought to be respected.
But what does the Second Amendment say in guaranteeing the right to bear arms? Not what zealots think it says. The amendment starts off by explaining itself: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State ...”
In 2008, the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia wrote the landmark opinion that found for the first time an individual right to bear arms. He did it — as he had to do to justify his reasoning — by denying that this important preamble had any great significance. Apparently the framers of the Constitution were partial to writing literary flourishes that had no meaning beyond the fun of it.
Ah, the legal gymnastics the justice performed in deflecting the obvious. No elf in a leotard ever soared so high or twisted so much. His argument was akin to looking at the cutlery on a dining room table and finding no suggestion that diners should not eat with their hands.
All of which was a missed opportunity and a great pity. Even if a militia could be construed as a collection of individuals, the amendment’s intent is clear. While no laws could prohibit bearing arms, regulation was necessary to the security of a free state. Yes, it is, plain as day. Even Justice Scalia recognized that the right to bear arms was not an absolute one, hence limits on who can own machine guns being constitutional.
We can still build on that if we can muster the good sense. But to do this, ridiculous arguments will have to be expelled like spent cartridges — that teachers should be armed, when we all remember ones who couldn’t remember where they put their lunch, that video games are the source of the problem, when they reflect life and American life is full of guns, that guns are the guarantee of our freedom, when the world has outstanding examples of nations where freedom is based, not on guns, but the consent of the governed.
It will also require liberals to acknowledge that the right to bear arms exists. It will require conservatives to acknowledge that sensible regulation is in everyone’s interest and with every right comes responsibilities. There is a way if our prayers are not hypocritical.
Reg Henry: rhenry@post-gazette.com
First Published: May 23, 2018, 4:00 a.m.
