@article{ref1,
title="Gun crazy - constitutional false consciousness and dereliction of dialogic responsibility",
journal="Boston University law review",
year="1995",
author="Herz, Andrew D.",
volume="75",
number="1",
pages="57-153",
abstract="This is an article about the causes and costs of false consciousness -- false consciousness regarding the constitutional concept of the &quot;right to bear arms.&quot; This is an article about the deceit, misperception, and dereliction of responsibility that have characterized America's dysfunctional gun control debate.My focus is on the claim that every proposed regulation of firearms necessarily implicates the Second Amendment. The gun lobby has successfully spun a mythical broad individual right to bear arms for all legal private purposes. Yet the courts have consistently found that the Second Amendment guarantees a right to bear arms only for those individuals who are part of the &quot;well regulated Militia&quot; -- today's stateside National Guard. Despite widespread belief to the contrary, the courts have clearly held that there is no right to bear arms for self-defense, hunting, or shooting competitions, much less arsenal-building in preparation for resistance of potential domestic tyranny.Those with the greatest ability and responsibility to challenge this constitutional myth -- politicians, journalists, and legal scholars -- have failed to do so. The body politic's widespread, and virtually unchallenged, belief in this vast right to bear arms has significantly undermined reform efforts to limit and regulate access to firearms. A constitutional false consciousness has perpetuated a system that provides notoriously easy access to all types of high-powered weapons. As a result, America has become the runaway world leader in gun violence.<p />",
language="",
issn="0006-8047",
doi="",
url="http://dx.doi.org/"
}