Gun Control Debate For Reasonable People
How much more blood needs to be shed in America until policy makers enact gun control measures is not known tonight. If history is our guide we have not yet reached the point of action from those who are beholden to gun lobby campaign cash. But there are plenty of people with facts and reason to show the path forward.
The New Yorker has a short column this evening that points in a direction I have long felt to be one that has merit.
Jill Lepore and Adam Gopnik have written about the ongoing debate over gun control. In “Battleground America,” from 2012, Lepore explores the history of America’s relationship with guns: how, she asks, did we get from the idea of a “well-regulated militia” to the notion that “every man can be his own policeman, and every woman hers”? And, earlier this fall, responding to a shooting at Umpqua Community College, Gopnik argued that we have misinterpreted the Constitution. To institute tighter gun control, he writes, “there is no need to amend the Constitution, or to alter the historical understanding of what the Second Amendment meant.” In fact, “if the Founders hadn’t wanted guns to be regulated, and thoroughly, they would not have put the phrase ‘well regulated’ in the amendment.” The Second Amendment is already a gun-control amendment.