Guns or violence?

Like all chick-or-the-egg arguments, what matters most is where we go from here.

Originally published on 7 Bridges

The intentions of America’s founders and the framers of our constitution still matter. They were animated by profound ideals, however imperfectly implemented, that resonate and provide essential, useful direction today. But when it comes to guns, I no longer care what the founders thought.

I’m tired of debating that comma, the definition of “militia”, and the meaning of “well-regulated”.

I’m tired of the claim that gun ownership is an absolute right.

I’m tired of the posture that reform is impossible.

What I care about is the kind of country and kind of society we want. Is a country with more guns than people with more violence than any similar nation who we want to be? Is an armed citizenry as a bulwark against state-based tyranny important to us? Even if it’s just for show? Is it more important than limiting society’s capacity for harm? Is the capacity to express hard power necessary to our concept of citizenship? The founders had their perspectives about these questions that no longer feel useful.

What do we think now? What should be the relationship between citizenship and hard power be now…