Why is there even a debate over gun control?

America

Doesn't  the 2nd Amendment preclude any and all debate? Congress shall not infringe on the right of citizens to keep and bear arms. 

Gun control proponents attack from two fronts. Some argue that the 2nd Amendment should be rescinded. Others argue that it should be more narrowly implemented. That is, you may keep your guns but the government should control them.

It seems that no resolution will be found for one simple reason: A lack of trust.

Those who advocate gun control do not trust law-abiding citizens to handle their weapons responsibly, without harming themselves or others within range. Many don't trust guns. Those who advocate the broadest application of the 2nd Amendment, who accept no form of gun control, simply do not trust the government to constrain itself. Gun control, they argue, will ultimately lead to gun confiscation. To them the slope really is slippery and if you scratch a gun control advocate, you most likely will find someone who advocates gun confiscation.

Is that always true?

Actually, no.

Let me tell you a story...

It was my first day on the rifle range in Basic Combat Training after joining the Army. The Range Officer began with a detailed explanation of what we were supposed to do the first time we went to the firing line. He told us to choose a stake along the line and lay our unloaded weapons on the ground with the muzzle leaning on the stake, facing down range. The weapons should be lying on their sides with the trigger pointing to the right. We were then supposed to stand at attention with the butt of our rifles between our feet. 

At his command we went to do as he instructed. Apparently we failed in some particulars on the first dozen or so attempts whereupon he and his assistants yelled at us to retrieve our weapons and step back from the firing line. Like many such routines in Basic Training, this one began to annoy me until I got the point of it.

He was establishing control.

We weren't allowed to proceed with the training until the Range Officer was confident that he had our undivided attention and were prepared to follow every instruction in minute detail without hurting ourselves or anyone else.

We practiced gun control even in the combat zone in Vietnam. When I led platoons outside the base camp perimeter no one was allowed to load their weapons or “lock and load” a round in the chamber until we were outside the wire. On return, I stood at the entrance and checked each man's weapon as they passed me to insure it was properly cleared. Even outside the base camp, soldiers practiced fire discipline (so we wouldn't shoot all of our ammunition during the excitement of an initial contact), were assigned fields of fire and given other instructions to insure that we engaged the enemy effectively and reduced the risks of injury by friendly fire.

Inside the base camp, weapons were even more carefully controlled. Everyone carried their M-16 and ammunition wherever they went but kept weapons unloaded. I well-remember a superior officer, a major, who entered my hooch one day with a loaded M-16 and grenades dangling from his web gear. I threw him out unceremoniously. Grenades were supposed to be left with armorers. There was a can filled with sand and painted red outside every hooch where we could “dry-fire” our weapons to insure that there wasn't a round in the chamber after removing the magazine.

Of course, we didn't have trust issues in the Army. We followed orders and trusted that others would follow them as well to keep ourselves safe. Accidents still happened, but they were rare. There is no such thing as absolute safety around guns. To be fair, there's no such thing as absolute safety anytime, anywhere, especially in a society of free citizens.

Thus, the question is how do we build the trust needed to implement and enforce common sense gun control? How do we move past these absurd roadblocks to common sense?

Can gun owners stifle their urge to kill? Can government stifle its urge to control?

Maybe we need to proceed in baby steps. Each side needs to give up something, just a little something to begin with.

Maybe those who fear that gun control will lead to gun confiscation need to see the government, as well as those who support big government, give up some modicum of power first, just to show good faith.

Maybe we could begin with Term Limits on members of Congress. That would be a good beginning, don't you think?