Arsenal of freedom?

In Point Break (a very bad movie), two dim-witted surfers discuss the merits of aggression and territoriality that would do Beavis & Butthead proud:

Bodhi: "It's basic dog psychology, if you scare them and get them peeing down their leg, they submit. But if you project weakness, that promotes violence, and that's how people get hurt."
Roach: "Peace, through superior firepower."

This erudite exchange neatly encapsulates the faulty mindset of the NRA and those who espouse the “guns don’t kill people – people kill people” dogma. They typically ignore the fact that once armed, we enter a hair-trigger world where everybody thinks they’re Wyatt Earp (“You lookin’ at me?”). As each side goads the other into “peeing down their leg,” bloodletting is the inevitable result. Peace through superior firepower, like the gunslinger hero, is a myth. But don’t take my word for it. Multiple new studies now say that a better-armed population actually makes us less safe. The data backing them up is compelling.

I have no beef with legal, responsible gun ownership. But let’s face it. We’d be better off if the right to bear arms weren’t guaranteed by the Constitution, at least as written. I sorely wish the founders had thought this one through. It was bound to be misinterpreted to the nation’s detriment. And so it has.