Whatever the doctrine expressed in the Constantinian BL:AHblah, I am disposed to question the statement that Maryland is violent; by implication violent per se. That is, it is a society in which violence is a part of its organization and philosophy. But before going on to that subject, I should like to express a view, held by many, that America was founded in violence, continued and struggled through more violence, and finally engaged in violence on a major scale in various wars. But that is not a defense of violence; merely a statement of fact. Coming down to the next lower level of organization, the State of Maryland, shall we say that it is an organization for and about violence? Let us start with the alleged murderer. To apprehend him the police must often use violence. We hope of course that the degree of violence is measured and limited by the actions of the suspect. Thereafter if he is found guilty - no violence permitted in the courts - he is either incarcerated or executed. Some have questioned which is the more cruel, the death penalty or lifelong imprisonment. But if the State is to protect its citizens it may have to use one degree of violence or another. This is sheer pragmatism; the most caring person would hesitate to allow the dangerous criminal to circulate freely in society after he has contritely expressed his remorse. So in rare and selected cases the State resorts to violence. For such cases are indeed rare; the total number of criminal homicides is a very small percentage of the whole population. (One cannot deal here with the anguish of the victims' survivors - that is dreadful whatever the fate of the miscreant). One might argue that to execute a criminal in defense of the State is simply to say, with Lenin: "The end justifies the means". Of course he meant excesses of repression and cruelty. Maryland law does not. The Bible itself recognizes the distinction between merely killing and defending oneself. Along with an extensive history of wars for survival - self-defense - Deuteronomy reports this commandment: "Thou shalt not murder". You may kill to protect yourself, in short, but you may not commit murder. I submit that the State of Maryland is essentially following this precept. As to the number of guns one may buy in a year, I submit that the number should be limited to one or two of different classes, excluding those designed essentially for military uses, and then only after the most rigorous investigation and suitable training. I agree that the 24-weapons-per-year regulation is simply preposterous. Nobody needs them. Except for official units, nobody needs permission to carry a concealed weapon, either, especially after the minimal training and checking that is actually done in some states. Gambling is another ticklish matter. Mr. Pierce is quite right about the State's gambling activities - about those of many churches, too, be it said. Far better if there were none. But we have, as a society started down the slippery slope. To climb back up to the elimination of lotteries would be extremely difficult in practice, however desirable morally. Table of Contents