Armed with rare political prescience, the founding fathers of the United States of America, knowing full well the ever evolving nature of language, wrote the affirmation of our life, liberty and pursuit of happiness on a parchment, carefully selecting the words that would best create a functional system of governance.(*)Interpretations of the Constitution can vary from bestowing the government the full force to impose any appropriate order, to preventing the mechanisms of the State from hindering the natural flourishing of civil society. As an illustration, the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution could have been meant to be immune from the often-times over-reaching-hand of the government, or, conversely, to restrict the possession of firearms to militias regulated by the government, i.e. the army and law enforcement.(*)Before debating the meaning of the Second Amendment, proper judgment requires determining the purpose of the whole Constitution, the larger framework.(*) Successfully breaking off all political ties with George III and England for violations against democratic principles, the signers, representing an agglomeration of colonies, drafted our Constitution to create a government that would allow the People of this nation to exercise their popular sovereignty. The founders intention in the creation of our Constitution would be moot if it were to spawn a dysfunctional government that would result in the same violations of the principles which led to our revolution. Obviously, no one would create a moribund giant or allow it to rot while entirely relying on the health of that giant.(*)This begets the question of whether the perseverance of a Republic based on democratic principles of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness obligates the virtual sanctity of firearm possession, or, in the name of public safety, an expansion of State power eclipsing an individuals right to possess guns. Arriving at a conclusion will require a detour through the examination of the current conditions surrounding the issue in America; firstly starting with the individuals that wield the guns and taunt the fates of men--the firearm owner; next turning to a historical glance of governments attempts to regulate firearms. CURRENT CONDITIONS Undoubtedly an over-stimulated and voluminous crowd of reckless or mentally deranged gun owners would tear the fabrics of society asunder, and might disrupt the activities of a struggling government.(*)Presently, evidence reasonably concludes the absence in the average person of an irrational desire to precipitate such calamities. Thankfully, those that are willing to take a life are few. In fact, the Federal Bureau of Investigation has shown that homicides by firearms has gradually diminished over the last many years despite the lifting of gun restrictions on assault weapons, and the overturning of regulations banning guns at the federal and state level. Ignoring these facts, a devoted portion of the population insist that a complete ban on guns stands as the only practical measure in the gun debate. This overly sanguine proposal strays from the realm of plausibility considering the number of guns owned by the public, and easily excites that part of our conscious that yearns for a utopian world. Even in a world devoid of guns, inevitably, the malicious few always find a way to carry forth their deadly plans--to rid the nation of guns would mean only to introduce a new and popular murderous toy. Skepticism of the idea of transforming society into a gun-free environment finds support not based on obstructionism but on reality. Loosely estimating, 57 million adult gun owners reside in this country with a substantial percentage owning more than one gun.(*)Reports show that firearm ownership and manufacturing has exploded in recent years. Even with a cease of production and importation of guns, these tools will continue to exist within our community, not to mention black markets. Indubitably, ploys to collect and destroy firearms float in the minds of a fair amount of voters.(*)Are we to sweep them away with brute, unrelenting force?(*)Our representatives of power could legally purchase the firearms from Americans that voluntarily consent to the transaction; however, clearly an obstinate number of gun owners would reject the offer and hesitate before returning to the negotiation table.(*)Perhaps the only probable alternative would require the patience to await sufficient progress of humanity to forego the use of guns for hostile reasons. A full scope of contemporary circumstances considers the unseen circumstances of State action. To lift the hand of the State against individuals possessing firearms would only hurt those that are fearful or are willing to comply--the innocent many. Though not as media-salivating as violent rampages, justifiable self-defense with the use of firearms has saved the lives of many persons from the senseless and violent acts of criminals. State force must be used to prevent gross and egregious violations of the law but not at the expense of the innocent.(*) Cold statistics like those presented in this argument can only be used for what they are: absolute numbers missing socioeconomic and mental health factors, not definitive causation tending to prove the righteousness of one policy over another. Reasonable minds can debate the rationality and fairness of public policies, but no one side can sincerely affirm that their policy is based on conclusive causations and correlations. Ruminations on the Second Amendment require not only an understanding of the contemporary circumstances but of the historical relationship between Governments and gun owners. HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE Governments have repeatedly chosen to take authoritative measures to relieve the State from popular aggression against the government. Popular possession of firearms has been under constant attack in the past: Soviet Union in 1929, Turkish Ottoman Empire in 1911, Guatemala in 1964, China in 1935, Cambodia in 1956 and Uganda in 1970, to name a few. All these measures resulted in nightmarish agony and despair for the respective people of these countries. Predicting the repetition of these acts can only be classified as pure speculation. Anyone who concludes with any certainty that humankind has evolved past the desire to commit such acts commits the act of being intellectually presumptuous. On a brighter note, American colonists successfully sought peace and stability when facing a threatening blade dangling above their necks ready to leave them defenseless.(*) Massachusetts colonists fired upon encroaching British soldiers commanded to disarm the colonists by confiscating the weapons cache stored at Concord. Despite the small chance of colonial victory against the British soldiers, the shots the Americans fired inspired other colonists to declare independence from an overbearing monarchical government. Meanwhile, in the south, Lord Dunmore, as the royal governor of the Virginia colony, in an attempt to disable the colonial militia, seized gunpowder held in Williamsburg--then the seat of the colonial government, and disbanded the colonial legislatures. American victory was possible only because of the colonists acceptance of the firearm as a last resort for protecting republican government and basic civil rights.(*)The Colonial Army seized the opportunity to fight for liberty allowing the colonists to cut the intolerable noose from around their neck and declare their right to the consent of government. Closer to our time, southern States enacted Jim Crow laws prohibiting Black Americans from owning firearms as a means to leave them defenseless against hateful terror. These repulsive acts by the governments and certain organized groups continued for another century in spite of the progression of the nation. Deacons for Defense, finding themselves outside the protection of the law, relied on self-defense by means of firearms to demand their determination to be recognized and respected. When the government--though the Deacons were constantly at odds with the institution itself in their struggle--refused or lacked the ability to support the black population of the southern States, the former NAACP branch militarized itself to combat all transgressions against their lives and the exercise of their right to be a thoroughly fulfilled individuals. In the midst of the civil rights movement, the laudable use of force by the Deacons allowed other groups to continue their non-violent campaigns in the pursuit of liberty. History aids in our evaluation of the value of guns, and the grand changes that come about when civilians are able to arm themselves. Guns have been used to advance political and social reformations, such as revolutions and the preservation of civil and political rights. Those that vehemently oppose gun possession fail to realize the obstacle they present to the looters of our creations, our minds and our lives. Thomas Jefferson boldly asked, And what country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Even if dismissed as hyperbolic rhetoric, the idea of an armed resistance against tyranny, especially in times of tranquility and ostensible prosperity, only seems appropriate when the point of cataclysm nears its approach. Now that the inconclusive claims have been dispensed, the debate lies with the principle that gun possession is necessary for the continuing functioning of our democratic Republic. SYMBOL OF DEMOCRACY We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. These blazing words of truth ignited our affirmation of the independence and equality of individuals, and the standard by which our country would forever be judged. The legitimacy of the State persists as long as the Government functions for the benefit of the people by the standard stated. In seeking to better the country and the people, the Government carries forth based on the guidance and approval of the popular will; concurrently, popular resistance to the State keeps the Government fastened on these tracks. If the Government created to secure these rights derive its just power from the consent of the governed, logically, the political authority, or rights, originated in the governed people; otherwise, the People will be powerless to keep the mammoth machinery on track, thus allowing Government to derail or lay its own destructive rails. Slowly, humanity has gathered that a Government runs as a beneficial institution to serve society as a whole when these political rights and forces are equally distributed among the people without any unreasonable and arbitrary conditions or restrictions. As will be later explained, the possession of firearms as a political force is paramount to keeping the collective railroad steaming ahead to protect life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The State, a completely artificial and abstract idea, does not precede the individual or society. As a conception conceived and molded by the hands and minds of humankind, the State wields only that power collectively held by its sculptors, the consenting governed, and no more. The creators cannot give their creature powers that they did not have individually. As Thomas Paine so eloquently put it, Man did not enter into society to become worse than he was before, not to have fewer rights than he had before, but to have those rights better secured. Pertinent to our country, our Declaration of Independence, the principles of the American Revolution, the Constitution and the Amendments that followed all established the structure by which our Government and the people can manifest their respective powers through political authority. In exchange for the political authority, the State ideally adopts the charge of promoting the common good, limited only by the bounds set by its charter. At its core, the common good, in a democratic Republic, is composed of respect for the life of an individual, celebrating an individuals liberty to experience the joys and pains of life that enables him or her to crystallize a full realization of self, and refraining from imposing unreasonable obstacles in his or her path towards happiness. The neglect or contempt of these basic human rights are the sole causes of public misfortunes and corruptions of Government. The accomplishment of its duty to the People awards the State legitimacy. A State that works against the benefit of the governed, or has become utterly useless, squanders the wealth of trust granted to it. The authority entrusted to it to promote the common good no longer finds validity, and any further utilization of that authority by the Government becomes illegitimate. With unwavering reverence to the interests of the popular sovereigns, the Government must perform its duty to keep the mantle, of the people, by the people, for the people. In a Republican form of government with strong democratic principles, the population naturally dictates the general direction of the State. As the trustees, the entire population steers the State according to the wind currents of the era. By encouraging the People to stand at the helm of the country, and surrendering any initiative to govern its own agenda, the State gains legitimacy. The State must be unbending to the temptations of its own ambitions and unconcerned for its own motivation. The Government, as an agent of the People, must proximate its acts to the popular will and attempt to render those acts proportional and congruent to its powers expounded in its charter. A democratic Republic tends to blur the antagonism between the People and the political class. Pleasant falsehoods subdue us in believing that angels have taken the form of kings of men aspiring to bring about heaven on Earth. Almost incredulously, the People wrongly assume that representatives only have the interest of the People at heart. In a letter to James Madison, Thomas Jefferson wrote, Ambition is so vigilant, and where it has a model always in view , is so prompt in seizing its advantages, that it can not be too closely watched, or too vigorously checked. Human frailty aggravates the susceptibility of public servants to become guilty of deliberate malfeasance, neglect, indifference and the Lucifer Effect. When the media performs its job adequately, it bombards the waves with numerous examples of government incompetence, arbitrary injustice by state officials, outright webs of perfidy woven by politicians, and pernicious actions under color of law. Repeatedly, Government has proven that it does not deserve our blind trust, but, as a glimmer of hope, the errors of men are corrigible if contested with objections and discussion. In moments when the State fails, only popular resistance can reverse the nations undesired course and restore public faith in the State. A perpetually invigorated vigilance and resistance by the People prevents the State from subverting the popular will or functioning contrary to its original purpose. Popular resistance forces our representatives, and the Government as a whole, to be transparent; explain the nature of their actions; and debate the value their acts add towards the public good and legitimacy of the State. These barriers to State action constantly remind the Government that the political authority entrusted to it were delegated by the People and are revocable whenever expedient. A despot acts with complete sovereignty over a whole nation and ignores, silences or punishes those that resist and oppose him. Obviously in this type of State, popular resistance, even by means of peaceful criticism, is unforgivable and seditious. In those countries, subjects have to cheerfully and actively carry out the commands of their ruler or, if they are so lucky, respectfully show passive obedience. It would be unjustifiable to mandate citizens of a democratic Republic to act in such a fashion, thus all members of We The People of the United States can openly criticize their Government. In an egalitarian society, equal distribution of popular sovereignty ensures the Government heeds the voice of the People allowing them to become masters of their own destiny. Though conservative in modern thought, this principle of egalitarianism pushed the liberal bounds at the ratification of our Constitution. As the country aged, this principle stretched the political boundaries further to rightfully assimilate more individuals. Now this principle stands as the dam forcing back the floods of injustice, corruption and abuse of power. In the 1930s, this country took on the bold project of damming the wild Colorado River. The success of the arch-gravity dam depended on each piece of material withstanding the aquatic force strenuously opposing its respective section. If one piece of the Hoover Dam loses structural integrity, the dam will leak and risk the collapse of the whole. Similarly, each citizen in our nation must possess equal rights and immunities to maintain the proper functioning of this political experiment. Where inequality of political force and rights exists, the popular will is incomplete and liable to pervert the form and nature of Government. Unlike the Hoover Dam, our political system incorporates features to redress any inequality and injustice. The ingenuity of the American governing system resides within the mechanisms engineered to avoid periodic and bloody revolutions to transform the Government. The People have been empowered with political powers to guarantee the capacity to undergo a perpetual and peaceful revolution through political resistance--speech, petitioning, voting and the use of justifiable force in the defense of life and liberty. To keep this Republic, Americans have the duty to proliferate the truth or their opinion through the printed word; to stand on top of a soapbox, eagerly attempting to persuade fellow citizens; to petition the government to rectify particular grievances; lawfully assemble like-minded persons to institute a change; and, finally, to vote. Exhausting as the means might be, as Thomas Paine wrote at the beginning of this marvelous experiment, Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigues of supporting it. All these political powers lead to the utilization of force to manifest the objectives of the popular will. Voting, the core of political authority vested in the sovereign, is the rawest form of political force. While not employing violence directly, voting allows for a majority to set privileges or miseries upon an unwilling population by the use of compulsion where needful; it authorizes representatives to enact laws and regulations that require enforcement by coercion or restoration by punishment. Justifiable defense of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is the only actual political right that permits direct violence. It is too simple to state that the Constitution enumerates the rights of the People. It goes farther in guaranteeing the principles of democracy. The Constitution protects a collection of rights that allow us to safeguard life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness by whichever means possible, including the use of force. In a revolutionary sense, firearms have become the mantelpiece of these democratic principles. The right to possess firearms is not about some future conflict, but about showing that the Government does not monopolize the use of force and violence. As a political right, the possession of firearms must be equally distributed to and invested in all sovereigns. The rifle eternally shines with the title, as referred to by George Orwell, of the symbol of democracy. A person can bear the absence of the ballot, zones designated for speech, or the invasion of privacy by the Government, but he will not bear the removal of his firearm, the very means to protect his life and liberty. It is the equivalent of sentencing a man to death, metaphorically speaking. Without this instrument of popular resistance of last resort, how will a person protect those democratic principles which were constantly paid for with blood? Without an armed People, why would the Government sincerely recognize the Peoples right to self-realization, dignity and the pursuit of happiness? Firearms act as the symbol of our intolerance for injustices of Governments. Firearms are for those periods of time when those that govern can no longer see the error in their judgments. When their intentions, no matter how benevolent they perceive them, obfuscate their moral compass. Lest we forget, [t]he disposition of mankind, whether as rulers or as fellow-citizens, to impose their own opinions and inclinations as a rule of conduct on others, is so energetically supported by some of the best and by some of the worst feeling incident to human nature, that it is hardly ever kept under restraint by anything but want of power. When the machine stops functioning as intended, the political elites will not change their ways based on polls or common sense. Only popular resistance will undo what they have done and restore the popular will as the operator of the State. When our votes are ignored by those that gain from our passive compliance; when our bodies are incarcerated behind bars and thick slabs of concrete; when our words are silenced by the deafening booms of cannons, our firearms will express our anger and frustration. Those claiming that humanity stands at the apex of progression without the need for political force are ultimately doomed to repeat the abysmal failures of their predecessors. Countless times, mankind has failed to resist the aggression of political rulers. Once capitulated, the People have succumbed to the subjugation of self-proclaimed divine monarchs, to godly-ordained poverty of mind and soul, and to being recruited as cannon fodder for the gain of the political class. The defense of liberty, life and the pursuit of happiness will always fall to the individual.(*)Revolutions, whether stemming from a desperate reach for salvation from a mediocre existence or from a protest of unforgiven violations of human rights, are not carried out by the armies and mercenaries of a state. They are carried out by the farmer protecting his land, the businessman guaranteeing her right to produce and the worker shaking off his shackles linking him to the undeserving.(*)Abandoning arms is the last mistake of a free people. If ever the hour arrives, firearms will be the last vestige of popular resistance and the only saving application of political power by the People. In the meantime, during these peaceful, and hopefully perpetual, years, these firearms, silently resting above the fireplace, serve as a reminder to the Government that the People in a democratic Republic hold the ultimate political authority.
