Guns, butter, freedom

The U.S. citizens who proudly wave around firearms as "their right!" are the same citizens who are proud that their country produces some of the finest jet fighters in the world. Their rhetoric is that they need these firearms to protect themselves against tyrannical government - as if the Queen of England might on a whim rummage through some old stockpiles and find redcoats with muskets to send to their door. They know in their hearts that their pea-shooters are irrelevant against a government with jet fighters and cruise missiles.

What they really won't say out loud is their fear is really of their neighbor, or the people in the neighborhood up the street, or across town; or of mob rule. Some of these people have never lived without the fear that the people in the other neighborhood will some day rise up and knock on their door, or fear that the country is filled with criminals just waiting for the right moment to take them out. So they can't possibly understand that "freedom" means more than needing to carry a firearm - that there might actually be freedom from the constant fear of whatever might be lurking outside ones doorstep.

These people will proclaim that they have the best democracy on earth, and their freedom to wave around a firearm is proof of it. Never mind that every evening their televisions bring them video examples of the worst governments on earth; scenes of people waving around firearms triumphantly because they have vanquished their neighbors. How alien is the notion that if democracy were truly successful, people wouldn't need firearms to protect themselves from their neighbors or the government; that the whole notion is that a compromise would have been reached towards democratic rules everyone could live with? And the government - which they elected is the one which they greatly fear? Again, it's the government their neighbors elected they fear - not the one they've happily bestowed with paramilitary equipment.

They might rationalize that the constitution doesn't guarantee happiness, it only allows for the pursuit of happiness. Yet could it not be possible for a democracy to create rules where, at the very least, firearms are not required to maintain the social fabric? There are a fair number of people who highly romanticize the frontier town; the old gunslinger who saves the town from the bully. They don't see themselves as the bully with the gun; they wait for the day they get to play hero. And they have no notion that perhaps by waving around their firearm, it just might be that they are the ones being the bully.