My Lil’ Punditry Kit Part III: Guns Galore
In this one, I exposed one of my less rational beliefs: total rights for the possession of any type of firearm (hey, me and ol’ Ron Paul can at least agree on this one).
Pro-gun Liberalism: It Makes Sense (9/16/07)
Despite my status as a loony lib in most regards, I’m a rabid supporter of the Second Amendment; for example, I recently read a tongue-in-cheek piece by Reason magazine called “The Right to Own a Bazooka” and found it highly informative rather than horrifying. So instead of using this space to play the Devil’s Advocate and rehash standard pro-gun control arguments, I’m going to show why it’s perfectly acceptable to integrate a pro-gun attitude into the liberal agenda, and why doing so may prove vital in order to wrest the Heartland from the Republicans next year.
No aspect of progressive ideology contradicts or precludes the right of individuals to arm and defend themselves; at times, gun control advocates even seem to spit in the face of progressivism. One of the main stated goals of gun control is to combat violence in inner cities and other low income/high crime areas; rather than focusing on the social ills that create such atmospheres of conflict, as any good liberal ought to do, gun control advocates seem to think that byzantine restrictions on property rights will alleviate the deeper issues. Such thinking is akin to combating drug use in impoverished areas by simply upping the sentences for drug possession: efforts to sell and use drugs are not deterred by such threats, and the abysmal educational facilities and nearly nonexistent job markets that lead young people to turn to crime for income are left underfunded and unaddressed. Instead of fighting ills such as gang violence by increasing focus on community development, educational initiatives (children are actually less likely to be shot in school than just about anywhere else) and social leg-up systems for the young and unemployed, we pour countless funds into police coffers and confiscate guns in violation of constitutional and fundamental rights.
Last year, the Democrats made big gains in Congress thanks in part to a wave of Midwestern “Blue Dogs” who tended to be both progressive and pro-gun. Single-issue gun voters represent a decent chunk of the population, particularly in the South and Midwest; people who otherwise despise the GOP’s authoritarian bend vote for them just because they’re afraid that the Democrats want to take away their property and their right to self-protection. This needs to change, especially if we want to retake the White House next November.
I agree with you on this point: your views on gun control are insane and irrational.
The major problem with your main argument is that you’re offering a false dichotomy. It’s not EITHER urban gun control OR urban leg-up iniatives; it can be BOTH.
I guess it is (at the moment) our constitutional right to own a gun, but just ’cause it’s in the Constitution doesn’t make it right, as much as your hero Ron Paul would tell you differently. After all, there was a lot of bullshit about slaves/Prohibition in there at one point. The strength of the Constitution lies in the fact that we can amend it (i.e., recognizing black people and women as human beings), not in standing by it unquestioningly.
I also dispute that owning a gun is a “fundamental” right. I guess you have a right to protect yourself, but I thought that was the whole point of society; we pay taxes so we have cops and laws who do that for us. Owning a gun is only a “fundamental” right in some sort of post-apocalyptic, “Mad Max” world. And don’t give me that “I use it for hunting” bullshit. Sports are not a sufficient reason to allow unfettered gun use in America (perhaps I will make an exception for mountainmen, who need to hunt for their survival, although I frown on them not using the more traditional method of knife or clever traps).
I generally agree with you on other matters, though; I just think that this particular belief is dangerously insane and irrational (that, and I’m trying to kill time until the new Say Anything album finishes downloading). Keep up the good work, broseph.
First off, I try not to use the “It’s right just because it’s in the Constitution” argument; if it sounds like I’m making it, that’s my fault. However, I WILL use the “It’s legal as long as it’s in the Constitution” argument.
On the point that one can have urban development AND urban gun control; that’s true (and obviously does happen), but the latter inevitably tends to cloud arguments for the former and siphons off valuable funds that could go to a more useful purpose.
I don’t see how you’re conflating the individual right to defend oneself with relying on a police force to protect you; I’m no anti-police anarcho-capitalist, but I think you’re treading into dangerous territory when you cede your right to self-preservation to a corruptable third party.
And lastly, what is this about new Say Anything album download? Linknaoplzkthxbai, as your favorite internet grammar speaking cat images would say.