The United States constitution, which was written over two hundred years ago, enshrines an individual's right to keep and bear arms.In 2000, the FBI estimated that 66% of the 15,517 murders that year were committed with firearms.Fatal shootings in recent years, many involving teenagers, has made the issue of gun control a key debate in US politics.The United States has the largest number of guns in private hands of any country in the world with 60 million people owning a combined arsenal of over 200 million firearms.The US constitution, which was written in 1787, enshrines the people's right to keep and bear arms in its Second Amendment.It reads: '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.'Although guns are permitted everywhere, the laws governing gun use vary considerably from state to state.Gun Control, Not ProhibitionAmending the Constitution to prohibit guns is rarely discussed as many Americans view the right to bear arms as an important civil liberty.Instead, the issue is whether or not it is lawful to impose stricter controls on gun usage.Proposed gun control legislation has concerned child-proof locks, background checks on gun purchasers, the outlawing of some types of assault weapons and, most recently, the creation of a nationwide database of ballistic fingerprints in order to track the movement of the nation's guns.American opinion is divided between those who insist on the universal right to bear arms and those who advocate stricter controls.The influential firearms lobby, headed by the National Rifle Association （NRA）, believes gun ownership to be a personal and moral right and dismisses the link between gun ownership and high gun violence with its slogan 'Guns don't kill people, people kill people.'Advocates of firearm control argue that the Second Amendment is anachronistic belonging to the long-gone days of the frontier. They point to the high levels of gun-related murder and violent crime in the US to stress the need for reform.The issue of removing the number of guns that are already in circulation is rarely discussed.More ControlsIn the past decade, public opinion has been gradually moved in favour of stricter gun control laws. In January 2001, 59% of the respondents in an ABC News/Washington Post survey said they favoured stricter gun control laws.After the horrific events in 1999 at Columbine High School in Colorado when two students shot dead 13 fellow students and each other, polls showed that two-thirds of Americans supported greater gun control measures. Moreover, 15 state legislatures passed significant gun control bills.The case of the Washington Sniper, who terrorised the suburbs of the nation's capital in late 2002 in a month-long shooting spree, killing 10 people and seriously wounding three, swiftly brought the issue of gun control onto the table once again.However, any new gun control legislation that comes before the Congress is sure to be vetoed by President George W. Bush, who is a long-time ally of the NRA.While he was governor of Texas, the President signed laws making it legal to carry concealed weapons and difficult for citizens to sue gun manufacturers.美國弗吉尼亞理工大學(xué)特大槍擊慘案將持槍合法的問題再次納入人們的視野。

有媒體諷刺說，這不是什么新聞，不過是把過去的數(shù)字改了一下而已。據(jù)統(tǒng)計，1998年以來，美國校園槍擊案就有8起，但是這都沒有改變美國的持槍政策，弗吉尼亞慘案后白宮仍然表態(tài)不會收緊槍支管理。 有報道顯示，美國的槍支擁有量在2億3千8百萬支到2億7千6百萬支之間，幾乎人均一支槍。粗看來，這近乎不可思議，危機四伏。但是并不能說美國因此相當(dāng)混亂，槍擊案的數(shù)量盡管跟槍支擁有量有關(guān)，它也同公民素質(zhì)、社會穩(wěn)定度、福利等多方面因素相關(guān)。 美國的持槍合法是寫在憲法中的。美國憲法第二修正案中寫道：“管理良好的民兵是保障自由州的安全所必需，人民持有和攜帶武器的權(quán)利不得侵犯?！闭f到底，美國的合法持槍政策最根本在于認可了人民暴力推翻政府的權(quán)力。在美國民眾看來，政府與人民是對立的，政府的權(quán)力空間擴大意味著民眾權(quán)利的壓縮。那么如果政府屢屢如此，如果人民無法用非暴力手段獲得自由與權(quán)利，可以拿起手中的武器推翻它。這樣的憲法條例不得不讓人肅然起敬。但同時，我也懷疑其實施初衷到底能夠?qū)崿F(xiàn)幾分？ 是否只有持槍才可以保障公民的這些權(quán)利？可以合法持槍是不是就一定能保障這些權(quán)利呢？報道稱，允許公民持槍的國家，警察武器的配置會比公民可以買到的槍性能各方面都好，以保障警察的安全，可見即便動用起暴力，公民也是處于弱勢的。更不要說警察、軍隊訓(xùn)練有素，而普通民眾即使是民兵又有多少可以達到這個層次。此外，在一個真正的法制國家，手槍保障公民合法權(quán)益不受侵犯，絕大多數(shù)只能在正當(dāng)防衛(wèi)的情況下，誠然這確實是為公民的安全提供了保障系數(shù)。但是另一方面，防衛(wèi)者可以合法持槍，侵犯者也是可以持槍的。如此一來，防衛(wèi)性的效果必然大大折扣，恐怕更壞的是蓄謀的侵犯者屢屢持槍得逞，而防衛(wèi)者恰好未持槍或者來不及開槍。比如被刺殺的肯尼迪，又如此次的弗吉尼亞慘案一樣，32名受害者毫無還手之力而被屠殺。自由的代7a64e59b9ee7ad9431333236396462價是慘痛的，無怪乎裴多菲說“生命誠可貴，愛情價更高。若為自由故，二者皆可拋”。美國人民在每次的槍支管理問題上激烈辯論，最終仍然保留著制憲者的初衷，這真是一個珍視自由的國度，愿意為自由承擔(dān)一次次慘痛的代價。自由女神是美國自由民主精神的象征，那么槍支管理更是這個國家自由民主的最真實實踐，一次次鮮血的實踐。 盡管我這樣的局外人認為這樣的實踐并沒有太大的意義，盡管我認為這也是如自由女神般的象征，但是尊重他們的選擇吧。