New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham on Sept. 8 created a firestorm with an executive order suspending for 30 days the right to concealed or open carry of a firearm in Bernalillo County (where Albuquerque, the state’s most populated city, is located).
In her order, the governor declared gun violence to be a “public health emergency,” using recent fatal shootings as examples and citing statistics showing that gun violence is the leading cause of death for New Mexicans under age 19.
Statistics actually provide a great deal of insight. First, in any given year, more than 50 percent of all gun-related deaths are suicides. This is profoundly relevant to Ms. Lujan Grisham’s concern for young people in her state (and throughout the country); according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, suicide has been the leading or second-leading cause of death for Americans under age 24 for the past quarter-century, and more than 50 percent of all suicides involve guns.
Homicide falls right behind, as the third leading cause of death in the same age demographic. A vast majority of gun homicides take place in our cities, perpetrated by young males using handguns that were acquired illegally.
Ever-larger numbers of American youth suffer from depression, anxiety, or a sense of hopelessness that makes suicide look like a desirable option. And our cities—and prisons—are filled with those who have neither respect nor reverence for life—theirs or others’. Single parenthood, widespread divorce, broken homes, absent fathers, gang violence, and the sexualization of every aspect of young people’s lives—just to name a few societal trends—have taken a brutal toll.
Opponents of Ms. Lujan Grisham’s executive order and other gun control efforts point to the U.S. Constitution and claim that the rights enshrined therein are inviolate. And it is often said that the Constitution is grounded in principles found in Judeo-Christianity. Both statements are true, but they neglect a fundamental point: The role of Judeo-Christianity in the success of the American political experiment lies not in its manifestation within the federal or state governments, but in the manifestation of those beliefs and values in the everyday conduct of ordinary Americans.
This is what our second president, John Adams, meant when he said: “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”
What we have been seeing at least since the 1960s is the abandonment of self-restraint. Our most significant cultural institutions encourage irresponsible behavior: The entertainment industry actively promotes immediate gratification, self-absorption, greed, envy, violence, sexual promiscuity, and substance abuse. The media amplifies and glorifies these behaviors. The government subsidizes them.
In this climate, we can’t be shocked when those behaviors become more widespread. And the consequences therefrom have become appallingly costly, in terms of not only monies from the public coffers, but also countless lives diminished or destroyed.
In addition to the heartbreaking statistics about suicide and homicide, 15- to 24-year-olds now consistently represent more than half of all cases of sexually transmitted diseases each year. Our cities are filled with homeless and mentally ill people, staggering or lying inert in substance-fueled stupors on streets filled with their urine and feces.
Thieves steal from lawful businesses and break into cars in broad daylight, and our government looks the other way. Mobs loot and destroy and burn entire city blocks to the ground, while academics and analysts dismiss this behavior as legitimate protest for social ills. Criminals who commit violent physical and sexual assaults, including rape and attempted murder, are released on low bail or no bail. Parents are having to fight with school boards and administrators over the inclusion of sexually explicit materials in grade school curricula and libraries, while teachers argue on TikTok that they have the right to share intimate details of their sexual identities and preferences with their students.
It is foolish, therefore, to think that just because a “right” or liberty is placed in the Constitution, it will remain inviolate forever. Eventually, enough mayhem will have occurred that people will clamor to amend the Constitution to restrict or even remove rights identified therein. One by one, the rights “guaranteed” by the Constitution will be taken away.
Whenever there are calls for a return to Judeo-Christian principles, the naysayers proclaim, “We don’t want a theocracy!”
