Tuesday, October 3, 2017

Gun Control and Human Rights

This topic comes up every time a mass shooting happens. People on one side claim we need more gun laws, people on the other side say we have too many. Both sides focus in on this one point and the argument goes round and round until we all move on to something else.

Reasonable Limits

I think most people can agree to some reasonable limits, such as individuals should not have atomic bombs or live active tanks. Even fully automatic weapons seems to be a reasonable restriction to most people. It is not reasonable to say that guns should be banned or that AR 15 should be banned. There also needs to be limits to these limits.

If someone says we need to have reasonable gun laws, instead of pushing back right away why not ask them what they mean when they say reasonable gun laws. This helps start the dialogue and will help clarify what they truly mean when they say reasonable limits.

More often than not some of the ‘reasonable laws’ are already on the books. Background checks and waiting periods are both reasonable laws that most people can agree on, though not all people. If you are a law abiding gun owner use your experience with guns to help people understand why some laws are a benefit and others would just hurt law abiding people.

The Right to Bear Arms

To understand why this is a human right you need to understand the reasons behind it. This amendment was included in the Bill of Rights is to act as a bulwark against a tyrannical government. A way to make sure the government does not infringe on the rights of the people. Government has a monopoly on the use of force in society, but the second amendment was designed to give pause to the government when deciding on using that force.

The founding fathers knew that the government was made up of people and understood the desire of some people to use the power of government to suppress other citizens they did not like or agree with. The right to bear arms is a way to balance these two opposing forces more evenly.

The government’s use of force can stop an individual or even a small group of people, but if the majority of people decide that the government is suppressing them than they will have the ability to rise up and throw off this oppressive government if the right to bear arms is protected. Of course this choice should never be made lightly, quickly or out of anger but only after reasoned attempts by the majority of the people to address the government for a redress of their grievances.

Politicians Actively Do Nothing

The phrase ‘reasonable gun control laws’ is thrown around a lot. The problem is what is reasonable to one person is very unreasonable to another. Assault weapons is another phrase you will hear. Politicians use these intentionally vague phrases and ideas as a way to appeal to a wide base of people. It is virtue signaling of the highest order. Simply put, they are taking a stance on one side of the issue but refuse to state specifics.

The politicians are afraid if they get specific then that could be used against them in the next election and they could lose their job. While I am sure most people can relate to losing their job as a big fear, it does not serve the interest of the American people.

If a politician is using these vague statements, you know that they are just trying to show their supporters they are on their side. If they truly wanted to do something they would create actionable items. Government moves slowly on purpose but if something is important enough than at minimum a plan of action is needed.

In these tragic times people are looking for answers and are angry and sad. Do not take things personally right away and try to understand them, not so you will be persuaded by them, but so that you can more effectively build your case against what they believe. Be reasonable and be understanding, but do not forfeit your liberty for safety.


No comments:

Post a Comment