The following example is provided to describe a moral and political responsibility that is not directly related to social sustainability.

In a democratic society where the right to bear arms is a fundamental political right, gun ownership is a carryover from Revolutionary times when gun ownership and use were necessary to oust the British monarchy from American soil. That right is so firmly established that gun ownership has become equated to the values of democracy.

From Wikipedia: The Second Amendment, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

The Second Amendment protects the right to keep and bear arms. The concept of a right to keep and bear arms existed within English common law long before the enactment of the Bill of Rights. Eighteenth century English jurist and judge Sir William Blackstone described this right as a public allowance under due restrictions, of the natural right of resistance and self-preservation, when the sanctions of society and laws are found insufficient to restrain the violence of oppression.

Gun violence in the United States results in thousands of deaths and injuries annually. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, in 2013, firearms were used in 84,258 nonfatal injuries (26.65 per 100,000 U.S. citizens) and 11,208 deaths by homicide (3.5 per 100,000), 21,175 by suicide with a firearm 505 deaths due to accidental discharge of a firearm, and 281 deaths due to firearms-use with "undetermined intent" for a total of 33,169 deaths related to firearms (excluding firearm deaths due to legal intervention). 1.3% of all deaths in the country were related to firearms.

When you see statistics as these, it is obvious that “Something is not working!” What is not working is the right to bear arms coupled with the incredible abuse of gun ownership and use. In a nation where political rights are preeminent, the abuse of any one right puts all rights in jeopardy of being removed from all citizens now and in the future. In a democratic nation the State and the public, individuals, are not separately or mutually responsible, but co-responsible with each other, and wholly responsible together for safe gun ownership and use of firearms.

To protect the 2nd Amendment rights of future generations to own firearms, it becomes necessary, as Sir William Blackstone described that, “This public allowance does not come without some ‘due restrictions.’” To protect gun ownership now and in the future, those “due restrictions” must include that gun ownership comes with obligatory socialization, enculturation, and training for the responsible use, storage, maintenance, sale, loaning, and borrowing of firearms.

The state has two particular moral responsibilities: First, the state, as the agent of the public, is responsible for assuring that the 2nd Amendment rights of individuals are protected and that future generations are able to enjoy gun ownership as surely as we do today.

Second, the state is responsible to assure that the public is protected from those who would abuse their right to gun ownership; and assure that the individuals who would own firearms are well prepared to enjoy this right without jeopardy to the public.

The state has failed in its socially sustainable moral responsibilities by assuming that citizens were born with the knowledge of responsible use of firearms. The state has done a far better job of educating and training drivers with the responsible use and skills of driving motor vehicles, which is not a political right.

As the agent of the people, the federal government has a moral obligation to protect its citizens from criminal predators, similarly as it protects them from foreign invaders. Such responsibilities require it to proactively and actively seek the means to neutralize or ameliorate such threats, which may include, in this case, the education, socialization, and enculturation of citizens from an early age in the responsible use, storage, maintenance, sale, borrowing, and loaning of firearms.

This may seem like a far reach for the federal government, but particularly necessary “…when the sanctions of society and laws are found insufficient to restrain the violence of oppression,” according to Sir William Blackstone.

In a nation where its citizens have chosen to pursue social stability, peace, and eventually the possibility of social sustainability, the preservation of political rights is essential in order to make those rights available to future generations. How is this possible? In a society that is moving toward socially sustainability the responsibilities of sustaining that society are shared. Individuals make sustaining decisions, and society, via its government, provides the mechanisms and processes so that individuals can make socially sustainable moral decisions that support that society.