of which u ere national poHtical parties.rnBeeansc American parties are alwaysrncoalitions, obtaining national politicalrnpower rec|uires enlarging the issues overrnwhich the parties fight, histead of pushingrnpolideal discourse downward, partiesrnmove issues up to the uncontrollablernstage of national polities. Calhoun’s associatesrnin the Southern states’-rights mocnicntrnfell into a similar trap. Whilernclaiming the United States was a compilationrnof many communities within a federalrnsjstern, tliey assumed the states existedrnas homogenous wholes. Eventually,rnthey came to view sectionalism as thernheart of national i.ssues.rnCalhoun stood apart from his contemporaries,rnhearkening back to the Jeffersonianrntradition. Like Jefferson, John Randolph,rnand John Taylor, Calhoun blamedrnmost of the country’s nahonal problemsrnnot entirely on sectionalism, but on thernconflict betvyeen tlie great body of producersrnand on minorihes using politicalrnpower at the majoriK’s expense. ThomasrnJefferson nexer assumed that ever}one inrnthe iS’orth stood against his brand of republicanism,rnand neither did Calhoun.rnBoth men beliexed the culprit to be misguidedrnpart)’ leaders. The nationalist fervorrnand thrill of parh- politics, whether underrnJohn Adams’ Federalists or HenryrnCla”s Whigs, acted as a “flight from principles”rnrather than a rational means of politicalrndiscernment. As Calhoun declaredrnin 1841,rnIt was much to be regretted that thernall absorbing question among thernpeople w as, not w hether great fundamentalrnprinciples should be establishedrnor oyerthrown, but whornshould be President.rnCheck asks us to reconsider Calhoun,rnif only to find solutions to om presentrnpredicaments. Like Calhorm, he be-rnHeves thatrnrepublican go’ernment must consistrnof more than the flux of votingrnand interest coalitions, politicalrnparties struggling to possess thern”honors and emoluments” associatedrnwith patronage, and the pursuitrnof power.rnThrotigh the Disquisition and the Discourse,rnCalhoun was instrumental inrnpassing on the legacy of Jeffersonian republicanismrnand popular rule to his generation.rnH. Lee Cheek offers one step inrnpassing Calhoun’s legae on to ours.rnCarey M. Roberts is an assistant professorrnof history at Arkansas ‘I’ecli University.rnSheep inrnSheep’s Clothingrnby Scott LahtirnNation of Cowards: Essays on thernEthics of Gun Controlrnby jcff SnyderrnSt. Ijjuis: Accurate Press;rn174 pp., $24.9SrnI eff Snxler’s tifle es,sa, originalK’ pub-rnJ lished in 199-? in the Public Interest,rnproxoked Newsweek colmnnist Ceorge F.rnWill to rush into print w ith well-timedrnsecond thoughts about his own earlierrnsuggestion that flie Second Amendmentrnbe repealed, i’hc cssa soon became arnregidation piece in the well-stocked armoriesrnof hundreds of pro-gun websites.rnCrime is rampant, Snder writes,rnbeeairse flie law-abiding, each ofrnis, condone it, excuse it, permit it,rnsubmit to it. We permit and encouragernit because we do not fightrnback, immediateh”, flien and there,rnwhere it happens. Crime is notrnrampant because we do not ha’crnenough prisons, because judgesrnand prosecutors are too soft, Ijecausernthe police are hamstrungrnwith absurd technicalities. The defeetrnis fliere, in our character. Wernare a nation of cowards and shirkersrn. . . Most people readiK beliee thatrnflie existence of flie police reliexcsrnthem of flic responsibilih’ to takernfull measures to protect themscK es.rn. . . If lioweer, on understandrnthat crime can occur at an\ here,rnantime, and if you understand thatrnou can be maimed or mortalKrnwounded in mere seconds, yournma- wish to consider w hether onrnare w illing to place flie responsibilityrnfor safeguarding our life in thernhands of oflicrs. . . . blow can ournrightfnlh’ a.sk anoflier human beingrnto risk his life to protect yours wJienrnou will assume no responsibilihrnyourself? . . . If ou beliee it reprehensiblernto possess flic means andrnwill to use lethal force to repel arncriminal assault, how can ou callrnupon another to do so tor ou?rnIn the 1 ^ essas that follow, Sn der analyzesrnflie delusions underKing the ictim-rndisarmament nioement. In an addressrneiitifled “The Efliies of flie Right tornKeep and Bear Anns,” Siider has his audiencernconduct mental exercises designedrnto illuminate flie illogic underlyingrnflic arguments fliat urge eapihilationrnto criminals. Since, for reasons of personalrnsafety, authorities counsel accessionrnto criminals’ demands, why shouldrnwe object to a law prohibiting any resfstancernwhatever on flie part of flie ictiiii,rnif it could thercb’ guarantee fliat all suchrnencounters would be injury-free? Sinder’srnrebuke is characteristicalh-pungent:rn[ W|li’ should criminals respect ourrnli’es or our libert)’, when we ourselrnes do not alue them liighKrnenough to assume flie responsibilih’rnto defend flieni, and do not holdrnriicm worfli fighting for? . . . | Wjli,rnif flie criminal is not to be met wiflirnimmediate, outraged resistance,rnwould a criminal beliex e fliat w hatrnhe is doing is actually wrong? Becausernlaws make it so? I’lien hisrncrime is soleK against the state, notrnagainst the person of flie ‘ietiiii.rnSnder scrutinizes flic creation of newrnclasses of crimes against flic state for flicrnpurpose of preventing crimes against cifizens.rnPassing laws prohibiting acts thatrnare not inherenflx” wrong (buing or sellingrna gun across state lines, or without arnwaiting period: owning a militar-stlcrn”assault rifle”) in tiie attempt to preentrnactual crimes to which the ma’ enentuall-rnbe linked is a process u liich, b’ den-rning an need for responsibility or selfcontrolrnon the part of the public,rnembodies an inner logic that has no rationalrnend-point.rnWe lie in a time when millions amongrnus liac grown aeeustonied to thinkingrnflie hiriicrto unfliinkable. to shedding flicrnfond illusion that “it can’t happen here,”rnand to wondering what, precisely, flie politicalrnconditions are that would jirstiiy organizedrnarmed resistance to a tyrannicalrngoernmeiit.rnIn his final cssa-, “I he Line in thernSand,” Sinder focuses on his deepestrnconcern —flic character and eflios of fliern30/CHRONICLESrnrnrn