Gun Control

A reelected Obama and his allies have begun new efforts for more gun control laws. We who believe in individual rights and limited government need to oppose those efforts.

We who believe in a right to arm ourselves do so as a consequence of a belief in a more fundamental right – the right of every person to self defense. We believe that a person has a right to protect himself, his family and associates, and his property against attack. Most of us also believe that a person can and should acquire the tools and skills to do so competently and effectively, which in the present context usually means getting firearms and learning to use them well and safely.  This belief in a right of self defense is the basis of our position on the political questions of  gun control, and, at bottom, a denial of  and contempt for that right are the basis of the position of the proponents of restrictive gun control.

It is no coincidence that most advocates of gun control are committed statists. There are a several  obvious reasons for this. If one believes that the government should decide and control most or all aspects of the citizens’ lives, it is natural for him also to think that the government is competent to provide all the protection anyone should ever need. If one believes that individuals are incompetent to deal with the vicissitudes and challenges of everyday life without the direct supervision of their betters in the government, it is natural to believe that  they are also unable to defend themselves and would be better off not resisting but rather submitting and hoping for the best when threatened or assaulted. Also, for those always seeking greater and more intrusive power, a disarmed populace is easier  to rule.

This last point is very important. The founding fathers of this country recognized the value of an armed citizenry as a deterrent to tyranny. It still is, and remains so as a general principle irrespective of how benignly the government or any government may be behaving at any particular time.  Governments and the notions of those in them change over time, and this deterrence is valuable as a permanent check on changes in really wrong directions. (In the light of all the conspiracy theories going around, I probably should mention explicitly that since this is a  general principle, it  has nothing to do with one’s opinion of the character or ambitions of either Obama or George W.  Bush.)

That leads to an  immediate political question for the millions of law abiding gun owners  to ask political advocates of gun control: since we pose absolutely no threat to them, why are they so eager to disarm us?  In the absence of any convincing answer, it is reasonable to consider the possibility that at least part of the reason is that they intend us harm and want us  to become more easily manageable.