I’m siding with the right on this one, although maybe not for the same reasons. Today the Supreme Court upheld the individual right to bear arms. Since most of you think of me as a “liberal” this may come as a surprise, but here are my reasons:
- I don’t like the idea of the Supreme Court removing liberties (of any kind) that had previously been assumed to apply to all. If they had sided with the District of Columbia on this one, it would have been another nail in Liberty’s coffin. What next? Freedom of Speech doesn’t apply to everyone? It was intended as a “collective” right?
- Most anti-gun advocates cite crime statistics as their reason to ban guns (as did DC.) But the presense of guns in our environment is not the reason people are committing crime. The vast majority of crimes are committed because
- A lot of things are illegal that shouldn’t be (i.e. drugs), and
- Because economic oppression of the lower class promotes gang and criminal activity.
These problems will not go away by banning guns. In fact, it will allow the government to continue to run roughshod over committers of consensual crimes and the lower class without fear of harsh reactions. Which leads me to
- If guns are outlawed, only the law will have guns.