Cynicism has killed the gun-control debate

Here's another reason why gun sales are on the rise: Americans are convinced that politicians aren't going to do anything about gun violence. Sixty-five members of his own party in the House of Representatives have urged the president not to resurrect the assault weapons ban that expired under George W. Bush. (One bright spot this year for gun control was in Maryland; the General Assembly authorized the confiscation of firearms from suspected domestic abusers.)

Most of us are also convinced that there are too many angry, ill and violent people in our midst, and that they have easy access to guns. Absent leadership that would promulgate greater control of guns, we fear mass killings will continue. So, the thinking goes, maybe it's best to be prepared - have a gun handy, just in case the madman comes to your office or your kid's school.

It's an epidemic of resignation, and it helps the National Rifle Association.

Once upon a time, the gun lobby would hide from the media after a mass killing at a school or in a workplace. But the guns-at-all-costs crowd claims that mass killings prove we need more Americans trained in the use of firearms and adequately armed. If more people were armed, we'd greatly reduce mass killings, the suggestion being that potential killers could be stopped before they cause much carnage.

We have in our midst millions of one-man militias - trusting no one, cynical about life in a changing society, convinced of the likelihood of more dysfunction and gun violence, and convinced, above all, that few in elected office have the guts to do anything about it.

Dan Rodricks' column appears Sundays on this page and Tuesdays in the news pages. He is host of the midday talk show on WYPR-FM.