|
19th
April, 2007
MAL
FLETCHER
The
world this week heard the horrifying news of yet another mass
shooting in an American education institution.
The shootings at Virginia Tech University, which claimed the
lives of 32 people, registered as America's deadliest peacetime
shooting incident.
"Outside
the US, people are left to wonder how the world's
most prosperous country and one which is billed as
the world's model democracy can allow events like
this to take place."
|
Police
say the gunman was Cho Seung-hui, a young English major student
from South Korea, whom a university official has described
as ‘a loner’. Not much is known about the mental
state of this man, but what is already clear is that these
events have sparked a new level of debate on the vexed issue
of gun rights in America.
Outside the US, people are left to wonder how the world's
most prosperous country and one which is billed as the world's
model democracy can allow events like this to take place.
If this were the first such event, things might be different;
but we all remember the mass killings at Columbine high school
just a few years ago and others before that.
From an American point of view, there are two fundamental
issues involved.
The first has to do with the second amendment to the US Constitution.
It states that: "A well regulated militia being necessary
to the security of a Free State, the right of the People to
keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
There are two interpretations of this clause. The gun lobby
says that it clearly gives every citizen the right to carry
arms, including modern high-tech weaponry.
The anti-gun groups say that it refers only to the bearing
of arms within a well-regulated citizen militia. The founding
fathers, they claim, were simply ensuring that America could
always raise a volunteer army - something the British had
refused to let them do.
Opponents of gun rights also point out that even if the founding
fathers intended people to have the right to bear arms, outside
of a militia, the amendment was written for 18th-century conditions,
in a world of muskets not semi-automatics.
The second issue from an American point of view is just as
important - and it is often missed by most of us living beyond
American shores. It is the issue of states’ versus federal
rights.
In the American system, states have the power to make many
laws, including those covering gun ownership. As long as those
laws are deemed by the courts to be constitutional, the federal
government cannot interfere.
For many Americans, the issue of gun ownership is one of states’
rights. They are suspicious of what they fear could become
an ultra-strong central government in Washington. By this
thinking, to limit gun ownership is to deny states their rights
to govern - and to threaten the grass-roots nature of democracy.
At the end of the day, however, all that matters is the preservation
of human life. The only way forward is for state governments
to have the courage to put an end to the farce of gun ownership
in a country where senseless violence by a few is ruining
the lives of the many.
Federal figures must lend their weight to such a stand and
the Supreme Court, America’s protector of the constitution,
must be willing to back it up.
"There
are an estimated 200 million guns in private ownership
in America today. One in three families possesses
at least one gun."
|
Wiping
out gun ownership would not be an easy thing to do. There
are an estimated 200 million guns in private ownership in
America today. One in three families possesses at least one
gun. However, a radical stand must be made before the problem
gets worse.
While most of America's politicians have focused on the threat
of terrorism to Homeland Security, a new breed of political
minds must arise with a commitment to ending the threat of
violence in-house. The gunning down of students as they prepare
for a day of lectures, by one of their own, is just as horrific
as the blowing up of buildings by terrorist groups from outside
the country.
The principle that must guide Americans forward has nothing
to do with the right to bear arms; it is about the right to
life. The bottom line must be: human life is the most precious
gift on earth, one we should fight to protect at all costs.
We should never be surprised that human beings are capable
of horrendous evil and laws on their own will not end violence.
It takes a fundamental heart change, a shift in the spiritual
condition of the individual, to bring about a true end to
violence.
Yet laws can and do serve to limit the behaviour of people
who would otherwise be free to act out their inner turmoil
in violent behaviour.
We should all pray that America's leaders will do the right
thing and, even if public opinion in the longer-term seems
against them, begin the process of removing guns from everyday
life.
Mal Fletcher is the founder and director of Next Wave International,
a Christian mission to contemporary cultures
with a special focus on Europe.
Reproduced with permission from
www.nextwaveonline.com.
Copyright Mal Fletcher 2007.
|
