92 lines
4.8 KiB
Plaintext
92 lines
4.8 KiB
Plaintext
Repeal Second Amendment and save lives
|
||
By George Will
|
||
|
||
Two staggering facts about today's America are the carnage that is a
|
||
consequence of virtually uncontrolled private ownership of guns and
|
||
Americas' toleration of that carnage.
|
||
|
||
Class, not racial, bias explains the toleration of scandals such as
|
||
this: More teen-age males die from gunfire than from all natural
|
||
causes combined, and a black male teenager is 11 times more likely
|
||
than a white to be killed by a bullet. If sons of the confident,
|
||
assertive, articulate middle class, regardless of race, were dying
|
||
in such epidemic numbers, gun control would be considered a national
|
||
imperative.
|
||
|
||
But another reason Americans live with a gun policy that is demonstratively
|
||
disastrous is that the subject was constitutionalized 200 years ago
|
||
this year in the Second Amendment: "A well regulated militia being
|
||
necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people
|
||
to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
|
||
|
||
Many gun control advocates argue that the unique 13-word preample
|
||
stipulates the Amendment's purpose in a way that severely narrows
|
||
constitutional protection of gun ownership. They say the Amendment
|
||
obviously provides no protection of individuals' gun ownership for
|
||
private purposes. They say it only provides an anachronistic protection
|
||
of states' rights to maintain militias.
|
||
|
||
However, Sanford Levinson of the University of Texas Law School
|
||
says that is far from obvious. In a Yale Law Journal article, "The
|
||
Embarrassing Second Amendment," he makes an argument that is
|
||
dismaying to those, like me, who favor both strict gun control and
|
||
strict construction of the Constitution. He begins with some historical
|
||
philology showing that the 18th century meaning of "militia" makes even
|
||
the amendment's preamble problematic.
|
||
|
||
He notes that if the Founders wanted only to protect states' rights
|
||
to maintain militias, they could have said simply, "Congress shall
|
||
have no power to prohibit state militias."
|
||
|
||
The Second Amendment is second only to the First Amendment's protections
|
||
of free speech, religion and assembly, because, Levinson argues, the
|
||
Second Amendment is integral to America's anti-statist theory of
|
||
republican government. That theory says that free individuals must
|
||
be independent of coercion, and such independence depends in part on
|
||
freedom from the meance of standing armies and government monopoly
|
||
on the means of force.
|
||
|
||
In a most important Supreme Court case concerning Congress' right to
|
||
regulate private gun ownership, upholding the conviction of a man who
|
||
failed to register his sawed-off shotgun, stressed the irrelevance
|
||
of that weapon to a well-regulated militia. Gun control advocates argue
|
||
that this lends no support to a constitutional right to ownership for
|
||
private purposes.
|
||
|
||
But Levinson notes that the court's ruling, far from weakening the Second
|
||
Amendment as a control on Congress, can be read as supporting
|
||
extreme anti-gun control arguments defending the right to own weapons,
|
||
such as assault rifles, that are relevant to modern warfare.
|
||
|
||
The foremost Founder, Madison, stressed (in Federalist Paper 46)
|
||
"the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the
|
||
people of almost every other nation." So central was the Second Amendment
|
||
to the understanding of America's political order, Justice Taney
|
||
in the Dred Scott decision said: Proof that blacks could not be citizens
|
||
is the fact that surely the Founders did not imagine them having the
|
||
right to possess arms.
|
||
|
||
The subject of gun control reveals a role reversal between liberals and
|
||
conservatives that makes both sides seem tendentious. Liberals, who usually
|
||
argue that constitutional rights must be respected regardless of
|
||
inconvenient social consequences, say the Second Amendment right is too
|
||
costly to honor. Conservatives who frequently favor applying cost-benefit
|
||
analyses to constitutional construction advocate an absolutist
|
||
construction of the Second Amendment.
|
||
|
||
The Bill of Rights should be modified only with extreme reluctance but
|
||
America has an extreme crisis of gunfire. And impatience to deal with
|
||
it can cause less than scrupulous readings in the Constitution.
|
||
|
||
Whatever right the Second Amendment protects is not as important as it
|
||
was 200 years ago, when the requirements of self-defense and food-
|
||
gathering made gun ownership almost universal. But whatever the right
|
||
is, there it is.
|
||
|
||
The National Rifle Association is perhaps correct and certainly is
|
||
plausible in its "strong" reading of the Second Amendment protection
|
||
of private gun ownership. Therefore gun control advocates who want
|
||
to square their policy preferences with the Constitution should squarely
|
||
face the need to deconstitutionalize the subject by repealing the
|
||
embarrassing amendment.
|
||
|