Wednesday, May 17, 2006

HNN Publishes Anti-Gun Screed... Again

For every good article on history over at HNN, we get about 8-10 horrifying screeds about the evils of the modern right wing and their birth in some old terror from America's (usually EEEEVIL) past. This time it's guns. See, the Second Amendment is really all about gun control, not individual rights.

There is much to be learned from America's first gun violence crisis and the first gun control movement. It is not surprising that during that struggle gun rights supporters tried to lay claim to the Second Amendment by reinterpreting it as an individual right of self defense. This argument continues to be effectively employed by opponents of gun regulation.

Modern gun control proponents have generally been embarrassed by the Second Amendment, viewing it as an anachronism. Early proponents of gun regulation did not make the same mistake. Rather than dismiss the Second Amendment as a remnant of America 's revolutionary past, they venerated it, reminding their opponents that the Second Amendment was about an obligation citizens owed to their government and communities to contribute to public defense. They also staked out another right that has not been much talked about recently in this debate: a right to be free from the fear of gun violence.

See, argument over. Except for a few sticky points. First, the author doesn't really show us ANY quotes or references to early proponents of gun regulation being an obligation to the state. Second, he just washes over that whole "right of the people" statement in the second amendment that, as we all know, every where else it's used within the Constitution means and indivual right. Lastly, where is that "right to be free from the fear of gun violence" written exactly. As a matter of fact, where does it say anywhere, in any form, the "right" to be free from fear of any kind. Come on. Hoplophobes like this are scared of guns. Myself, I'm scared of the uber-nanny-state trying to put foam padding around everything in sight that it hasn't already found a method of outlawing. Fear runs in a lot of ways, and freedom from fear is just not a part of the Constitution.

1 comment:

Nylarthotep said...

Yep, this one has gotten up a lot of people's noses. The worst part being that his article doesn't actually provide any support for his suppositions.

The Smallest Minority piece responding to this is quite good in that it does quote and provide analysis. Of course, it's a fisking so he's not trying to be nice, but he does provide quotes and links.