In the ebb and flow of politics, debate regarding issues of government "interference" has been a rather prominent and constant feature. Gun control, being extent, has been on my mind particularly because it serves as an example of a government "interference" issue and though much of my current thinking has revolved around this particular topic, I shall avoid making excessive references to it for the sake of addressing a larger issue with wider application.

When the founding fathers designed to form a separate and free nation, they encountered the problem of inappropriate government interference within the business and personal realms of life. In Declaration of Independence we read:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

Herein we read that the purpose of a government is to protect the "unalienable" or god-given rights of its citizens. The preamble to the United States Constitution follows:

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

Herein we see laid out the fundamental responsibilities, which the founders of our nation claimed should be laid out for our government. It should be understood that the founding fathers did not view government as an institution that should be charged with removing its citizens from all the trials in the world, nor should it be an institution, which should prevent us from appropriately providing for ourselves. However, it would seem that many view their government as ultimately responsible for their comfort and safety. It would seem that in many instances people begin to lose a feeling of personal responsibility for their own state of well-being.

Almost beyond comprehension, are the expectations that the government must be flawlessly vigilant and responsible for one's safety. However it seems that such has been the case to the extent that people in many instances do not even believe in the principle of self-defense.

Here it is apparent that the issue of gun control has been on my mind. It would seem that gun ownership, or the providing of some other means of defending one's own life, liberty, and property is more than just a right, but a responsibility that one has for the protection of himself and his family.

Governments were instituted to augment our own efforts at preserving our fundamental rights, not to replace them. Inasmuch as a people has lost the will to preserve its own rights it would seem questionable whether or not that people is competent to establish or maintain a government fit to preserve those rights.

Likewise this principle can be applied to many of the issues that plague free nations where people are asked to play a role in how their rights are preserved. (Being the only kind of nation in which their rights can be preserved.)

How fundamental is it then that we play an active and concerned role in our own governance. One would expect that an active participation in government (which is much more than simply politics) would make citizens more mindful of exactly how difficult it is to protect our precious freedoms. In taking responsibility in the protection of one's own freedoms, one also learns a valuable lesson in how valuable that freedom really is.