There are two very important motivations associated with the personal protection arguments in favor of acknowledging the right to keep and bear arms: First, the more the government confiscates guns the more it makes honest citizens vulnerable to gun toting criminals. Leftists tell soccer moms that they want to make them and their children safer by restricting gun rights on the margins. But rational analysis of this approach, meaning analysis made mostly by men, prompts the conclusion that every restriction only enhances the danger as it leaves the innocent more vulnerable.
In order to have a relatively safe society made that way by the absence of guns it is necessary to impose a draconian ban on virtually all privately held guns such as exists here in Germany. Until the point of nearly total confiscation is reached, the law of unintended consequences makes matters worse. And once the tipping point of total confiscation is reached, real questions of liberty of the individual vis – a – vie the government become more real.
Second, Nathan Bedford's First Maxim of American Politics should be considered: All politics in America is not local but ultimately racial. As we experience weekend after weekend of gun violence in places like Chicago and people become aware that this violence is statistically an African-American activity, whites naturally ask, how can I protect myself and my family from this anarchy? Whites are feeling increasingly disenfranchised, increasingly estranged from their government, they are increasingly losing confidence in the ability of the government to behave reasonably much less efficiently or effectively, so they increasingly think of self-help.
This motivation is clearly already in evidence in the African-American ghettos where it is common knowledge in places like the South side of Chicago that the authorities will not strictly punish gun possession forcing the conclusion that to go unarmed in certain areas is to go naked. It is not surprising that white suburbanites are coming to the same conclusion.
So as the electorate looks at the relative ability of the government to save them from mindless gun violence as opposed to their own ability to protect themselves by going armed, rational voters come to rational conclusions.
Americans across the board draw precisely the opposite conclusions from those drawn by The Guardian after a bloody weekend in Chicago. It will be interesting to see the progression of feelings about gun ownership in Great Britain as demographics there continue to change, pushing whites into minority status and granting minorities, almost by default, the exclusive power associated with (illegal) gun possession. The trend is today in relatively early stages but it is likely to accelerate.
