For the first time in recent memory, I am taking a stand and not backing down even though I'm scared.
I know many people who own and use guns responsibly. I know many people who own and use guns responsibly and also believe that we need much stricter gun control.
But I also know that among the many, many, many, many, many gun owners who consider themselves law-abiding citizens will be more than a few who decide that this "assault" on their 2nd Amendment rights constitutes an act of war. In their complete inability to understand that democracy is about NOT using violence to solve our deepest, most painful conflicts, some of these few will decide it is time to take action into their own hands. These are people who do not understand that living in a democracy ultimately means, giving up your own deepest beliefs when the majority is against you. It means letting go of slavery when the will of the nation decides it is wrong--letting go peacefully, because the exact thing you value most, if you are a true patriot, is the precious right of each of us to vote our conscience and the precious responsibility of each of us to abide by the outcome of that vote.
I suspect there are people in this country--maybe even in my neighborhood--who will see an argument like this and decide that their enemies need to be silenced. And this is what is scary.
I cannot be afraid any longer. The secret of a successful bully is to intimidate his or her victim into silence, to make them fear that retribution for standing up for themselves will be much worse than the assaults and threats they already suffer.
The gun lobby knows this. The people who defend their 2nd Amendment rights benefit from the implied threat of violence their access to guns gives them. They do not have to say anything. They can be smug in their "superior" position. They can be silent, relying on the echo of grim jokes about prying guns from cold, dead hands.
But I am not powerless. I am empowered. I am empowered by the knowledge that the instant one of them uses a gun, and not a vote, to defend a position, that person has destroyed the illusion of their patriotism, of their commitment to the Constitution. And in that same moment, they have exposed their complete misunderstanding of the power of that Amendment.
Because, in a democracy, We the People, ARE the government. Our collective will is the law of the land. If we, as a government, arrive at the decision that the 2nd Amendment has a different meaning than some ascribe to it, then this decision becomes the law of the land. If, through the democratic process, we arrive at the conclusion that assault weapons, semi-automatic weapons, and/or handguns, and the ammunition for such weapons, need to go, then there are only two choices: As an American, you submit to that decision even if you vow to continue to speak against it in the hope of one day overturning it. Or, if you cannot accept a democratically derived decision, you have the freedom to surrender your citizenship and find a place where your vision and understanding are shared.
What you do not have any right to do is to challenge, with arms, a decision of the American people arrived at through the democratic process. You do not have the right, in a democracy, to assert yourself with violence against the collective will. You cannot claim any higher moral ground, any "better" understanding, any "right" interpretation of our Constitution. It takes meaning only from what We the People ascribe to it. Our Constitution has been interpreted from the earliest days. We express our views through word and writing and the way we spend our money, and then we trust in the process. If we do not trust in the process--the process of government for, by, and of the People--we are betraying our Constitution.
In the age of Jefferson as well as the age of Lincoln, the majority of Americans understood this. They understood that you cannot choose to live in America and decline to honor the Constitution, decline to accept the Will of the People, however distasteful that Will may be to you. They understood you cannot claim one inch of American soil as yours while refusing to honor the Constitution.
Embedded in the 2nd Amendment is the premise that the vigilance of the people is essential to protecting our democracy. It is a premise acknowledged--no, embraced--by our founders. Our vigilance means an active participation in the democratic process. It means tolerating continuous dissent and accepting views radically different from our own and promising ourselves and one another that--above all--our differences will be resolved peacefully. This does not preclude anger and frustration and bitter arguments. It does not preclude the ugliness of uncivil debate (although I'd like to think we are better than that, too). It should preclude dishonesty and intentional obfuscation of the truth, but as that is dependent on the moral character of each individual, we can only hope for better than that.
What each of us must bring to the debate is, first and foremost, the willingness to accept that democracy involves responsibilities as well as rights. And there is more: democracy requires each of us to question the information provided to us, especially the information provided by like-minded people. It requires us to sift through the evidence to the best of our own ability, and to reach our own conclusions. It demands that we accept that others may have different goals from us. It expects each of us to find the courage to submit to what we cannot always understand. Democracy is simply an act of faith, submission to the Will of the People. If you can't live with that, you aren't much of an American to begin with.
Or, more likely
I know many people who own and use guns responsibly. I know many people who own and use guns responsibly and also believe that we need much stricter gun control.
But I also know that among the many, many, many, many, many gun owners who consider themselves law-abiding citizens will be more than a few who decide that this "assault" on their 2nd Amendment rights constitutes an act of war. In their complete inability to understand that democracy is about NOT using violence to solve our deepest, most painful conflicts, some of these few will decide it is time to take action into their own hands. These are people who do not understand that living in a democracy ultimately means, giving up your own deepest beliefs when the majority is against you. It means letting go of slavery when the will of the nation decides it is wrong--letting go peacefully, because the exact thing you value most, if you are a true patriot, is the precious right of each of us to vote our conscience and the precious responsibility of each of us to abide by the outcome of that vote.
I suspect there are people in this country--maybe even in my neighborhood--who will see an argument like this and decide that their enemies need to be silenced. And this is what is scary.
I cannot be afraid any longer. The secret of a successful bully is to intimidate his or her victim into silence, to make them fear that retribution for standing up for themselves will be much worse than the assaults and threats they already suffer.
The gun lobby knows this. The people who defend their 2nd Amendment rights benefit from the implied threat of violence their access to guns gives them. They do not have to say anything. They can be smug in their "superior" position. They can be silent, relying on the echo of grim jokes about prying guns from cold, dead hands.
But I am not powerless. I am empowered. I am empowered by the knowledge that the instant one of them uses a gun, and not a vote, to defend a position, that person has destroyed the illusion of their patriotism, of their commitment to the Constitution. And in that same moment, they have exposed their complete misunderstanding of the power of that Amendment.
Because, in a democracy, We the People, ARE the government. Our collective will is the law of the land. If we, as a government, arrive at the decision that the 2nd Amendment has a different meaning than some ascribe to it, then this decision becomes the law of the land. If, through the democratic process, we arrive at the conclusion that assault weapons, semi-automatic weapons, and/or handguns, and the ammunition for such weapons, need to go, then there are only two choices: As an American, you submit to that decision even if you vow to continue to speak against it in the hope of one day overturning it. Or, if you cannot accept a democratically derived decision, you have the freedom to surrender your citizenship and find a place where your vision and understanding are shared.
What you do not have any right to do is to challenge, with arms, a decision of the American people arrived at through the democratic process. You do not have the right, in a democracy, to assert yourself with violence against the collective will. You cannot claim any higher moral ground, any "better" understanding, any "right" interpretation of our Constitution. It takes meaning only from what We the People ascribe to it. Our Constitution has been interpreted from the earliest days. We express our views through word and writing and the way we spend our money, and then we trust in the process. If we do not trust in the process--the process of government for, by, and of the People--we are betraying our Constitution.
In the age of Jefferson as well as the age of Lincoln, the majority of Americans understood this. They understood that you cannot choose to live in America and decline to honor the Constitution, decline to accept the Will of the People, however distasteful that Will may be to you. They understood you cannot claim one inch of American soil as yours while refusing to honor the Constitution.
Embedded in the 2nd Amendment is the premise that the vigilance of the people is essential to protecting our democracy. It is a premise acknowledged--no, embraced--by our founders. Our vigilance means an active participation in the democratic process. It means tolerating continuous dissent and accepting views radically different from our own and promising ourselves and one another that--above all--our differences will be resolved peacefully. This does not preclude anger and frustration and bitter arguments. It does not preclude the ugliness of uncivil debate (although I'd like to think we are better than that, too). It should preclude dishonesty and intentional obfuscation of the truth, but as that is dependent on the moral character of each individual, we can only hope for better than that.
What each of us must bring to the debate is, first and foremost, the willingness to accept that democracy involves responsibilities as well as rights. And there is more: democracy requires each of us to question the information provided to us, especially the information provided by like-minded people. It requires us to sift through the evidence to the best of our own ability, and to reach our own conclusions. It demands that we accept that others may have different goals from us. It expects each of us to find the courage to submit to what we cannot always understand. Democracy is simply an act of faith, submission to the Will of the People. If you can't live with that, you aren't much of an American to begin with.
Or, more likely
No comments:
Post a Comment