The raging debate over gun control has caused a lot of silliness — both from gun control proponents and supporters of gun rights. But it is has also brought out some extremely dangerous and short-sighted arguments from some people, and I would like to highlight one especially dangerous one.
This post makes the following argument:
It is the rights culture—the relentless assumption, which liberals pioneered and conservatives have accepted, that the Bill of Rights isolates the individual from considerations of the common good decided upon by the representatives of deliberate majorities.
This particular argument is aimed at the “right to bear arms,” which the Constitution says shall not be infringed. But it is also aimed at the idea that these rights should remain inviolate even if the majority deems these rights can be taken away.
The Constitution makes it clear that rights are inviolate, and the purpose of the Bill of Rights is to highlight certain rights that are to be especially protected. The foundation of these rights is the assumption, outlined twice in the Constitution, that the rights of life, liberty and property shall not be infringed. The rights protected in the Bill of Rights all flow from these three foundational rights to life, liberty and property. So, you have the right to free speech because you have the right to liberty. You have the right to freedom of religion because of the right to liberty. You have the right to the protection from unreasonable searches and seizures because you have the right to liberty and also a right to property. Your home belongs to you, not the government.
The 2nd amendment is based on all three rights: you should be able to own a gun to protect your own life and to protect your liberty, but also you should able to own a gun because it is your property and it is a key element to allowing you to protect your own property. This right to own a weapon was established in the 17th century English Bill of Rights and clearly recognized by colonists as a fundamental right that was established by English common law.
We can see here that the “rights culture” is not some fantasy of right-wing fanatics. It is central to the foundation of the republic. But what is often ignored by critics of the “rights culture” is the fact that tyranny takes place when we, in moments of passion, abandon the “rights culture.” Reminding ourselves that we have certain rights — even if the majority opposes them — is what separates us from the savages.
Continue reading →