by Sven Triloqvist
Tue Apr 17th, 2007 at 05:54:33 AM EST
The Second Amendment reads: "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."
What does that mean? Does it mean that should the government need to raise a well-regulated militia, they need to draw from a pool of armed citizens? Or does it mean that the People have the right to bear arms (only) in a well-regulated militia?
The tragic deaths of more than 30 students at Virginia Tech yet again raises the question of why 'the most powerful nation on earth' allows its citizens do be armed. I am aware that the powerful National Rifle Association does not represent all Americans.
In reaction to yesterday's news US Senator and Presidential hopeful John McCain said the shooting rampage at Virginia Tech does not change his view that the Constitution guarantees everyone the right to carry a weapon.
"We have to look at what happened here, but it doesn't change my views on the Second Amendment, except to make sure that these kinds of weapons don't fall into the hands of bad people," McCain said Monday in response to a question.
Bad people?
Mental disorders are common in the United States and internationally. An estimated 26.2 percent of Americans ages 18 and older -- about one in four adults -- suffer from a diagnosable mental disorder in a given year. When applied to the 2004 U.S. Census residential population estimate for ages 18 and older, this figure translates to 57.7 million people. Even though mental disorders are widespread in the population, the main burden of illness is concentrated in a much smaller proportion -- about 6 percent, or 1 in 17 -- who suffer from a serious mental illness. In addition, mental disorders are the leading cause of disability in the U.S. and Canada for ages 15-44. Many people suffer from more than one mental disorder at a given time. Nearly half (45 percent) of those with any mental disorder meet criteria for 2 or more disorders, with severity strongly related to comorbidity.
Above from the National Institute of Mental Health.
As a European, I think I can just about get my head around a historical culture of homestead defence in inhospitable environments. It is, after all, less than 150 years since the Wild West. Hardly enough time to put away all the rifles and pistols kept for such defence. And I can understand, but am against, the killing of animals for pleasure. However - mea culpa - I recently enjoyed an elk steak supplied by a friend's father - a hunter who takes part every year in the strictly controlled cull of elk in Finland.
But who, in their right mind, would regard Uzis, 50 calibre rifles or bazookas as part of hunting - unless the quarry were human?
Violence exists in almost all societies. Anger, vengefulness, passion, frustration, despair: you will find these everywhere. What you do, as a society, is to limit access to the excessive tools of violence, as far as possible, by law and cultural expression - not only on behalf of potential victims, but also on behalf of the potential perpetrators.
A society that will not or cannot limit access is a lawless or flawed society.
