Are you a gun liberal or gun conservative?

[Pterodon]

I’m a gun conservative and if I don’t like guns I don’t buy one

I’m a gun liberal and if I don’t like guns I want them totally banned for everyone

[nightdrot]

This is the fallacy of the false alternative. As I wrote elsewhere on this site on this topic, we accept, with any right, the potentiality that it may conduce to evil as much as it may conduce to good. The method by which a right is exercised is less consequential then the social context and intellectual suppositions in which it is exercised.

The real issue with the Second Amendment is that rights are viewed by Americans in absolutist terms. As Burke pointed out, such "natural rights" do exist, but "their abstract perfection is their practical defect." Such rights are applied with too little regard to the cultural context in which they exist.

There is much to suggest that the culture is incapable of prudently and sensibly managing the rights it abstractly attributes to itself. Alexander Hamilton made the point that if you have a Bill of Rights you extend to the government the authority to regulate those rights.

Indeed, the regulation of those rights is actually routine. Free speech is limited by slander, perjury, defamation and copyright laws, among others. Freedom of religion is allowed consistent with public order - if a religion calls for human sacrifice, it is prohibited. There are other examples and the list is long.

However, in the matter of the right to bear arms, in part, guns are woven into the culture in various ways. An emphasis on self-defense - particularly in urban areas where crime tends to be high - rural areas where hunting is an important sport, gun collectors and gun clubs, and, as you noted, an ethic rooted in America's libertarian traditions of resistance to tyranny. (Though the notion that the government is a threat to liberty at this interregnum in the nation's life is patently absurd. So supine is the government that it cannot even balance its budget lest it ask the public to pay for what they buy.)

The segment of the population that tends toward absolutism on the Second Amendment is actually quite small, but is extremely intense. Whereas those who take a more nuanced view of gun rights tend to be less intense and more ambivalent. It is not generally their top priority and so the country tends, on the whole, to give both culturally and legally a wide scope to gun rights.

However, it is not at all clear that the culture, as it devolves into a populist tone and an abstract libertarianism with an emphasis on individualism at the expense of community standards, that the society can handle responsibly the rights it has accrued to itself. Including gun rights.

Burke said "men have no right to that which is not reasonable," and rights must be defined through the prism of the context in which they are exercised. What the nation has in the Second Amendment is a right that presupposes an ethic of community standards that are at this moment in the nation's life, at best, fraying. In short, that presupposition needs to be re-examined and, pace Hamilton, the right needs to be regulated in the light of such a re-examination.

In short, what matters is not the method, but the ethical and social context in which rights are defined and exercised. Americans are, in this time in history, inclined to view freedom as an end in itself and not a means to an end and thus rights are defined in absolutist terms. Here is where the problem begins.

[Pterodon]

💤💤💤 you like to hear yourself talk. Just answer the question I don’t need a dissertation

[nightdrot]

Then don't read it. In my view serious questions deserve serious responses. "Yes" and "No" don't quite meet that standard/

That noted, as I say, if you don't want to read it - don't. I wrote it for those who care about the issue - and have better manners. That seemingly not including yourself.

[Pterodon]

Everything boils down to yes or no. You can spend your whole life debating it but the final answer is yes or no

[nightdrot]

Actually, not. Reality is nuance and discerning the gray areas. Gun control is definitely one of those gray areas.

Reality is nuance and recognizing that not every problem has a solution. Rather it is a question of managing the problems as best you can.

[Pterodon]

But it’s still a yes or no choice. There is no shades of grey. The only ones who say that are simpletons that can’t make up their mind or are too afraid to

[nightdrot]

Yes, life is always that simple. As I say, not ever problem has a solution. Some problems are just difficulties that you must manage as best you can, So today is "Yes." Tomorrow it is "No." The next day back to "Yes." and back and forth and back and forth, world without end.

It is the illusion of finality.

[nightdrot]

Just to add. "Yes or "No" are NOT synonymous with "True" or "False," "Right or Wrong." It is why there are whole libraries filled to the brim with books. Reasoned debate and discussion are the wellsprings of reason and truth, so far as the latter can be discerned by a finite human reason.

[Julie4]

I am not legitimate to talk about this issue of firearms in the US, but I think that the US should still have stricter regulations on the carrying of firearms.

Indeed, the US has one of the highest death rates from firearms among the most developed countries, even if you compare it to the number of inhabitants.

Of course the majority of Americans behave well, if this were not the case the country would be on fire. However, by having looser rules about obtaining a gun you increase the risk that criminals, mentally ill people, and terrorists will be able to obtain guns more easily, which increases the risk of gun violence.

Of course, even with stricter regulations, it doesn't mean there will be more tragedy, only that you reduce the risk of it happening.

In sum, while I understand the pro-gun argument, I think the risks to public safety are too great to justify easy access to guns. Gun control policies should be put in place to ensure that guns do not fall into the wrong hands and to protect the lives of citizens.

[nightdrot]

@Julie4 Well, I don't know if you read my piece, but we are basically in agreement. There is a constitutional right to bear arms as articulated in the Bill of Rights. As Hamilton pointed out, if you have an articulated bill of rights, the government has standing to, short of outright abolition, regulate those rights.

Americans have tended to define the problem as either/or, when in fact it is more nuanced than that. The problem with your side of the argument is that, as the saying goes, if you outlaw guns, only the outlaws will have guns.

Those who are inclined to disobey the law will not likely observe a firearms ban. Hence another case for a more nuanced position than the stark either/or that characterizes so much of the American debate on the gun question.

[Summeroflove]

Yeah. For sure. Liberals don’t understand criminals don’t follow laws. Drugs are against the law. We have those. Murder is against the law so is armed robbery.


All they do is take law abiding citizens who either give up their guns or make them into criminals

[Anonymous]

I'm OK with guns as long as the owners aren't on dangerous antidepressants which are far more dangerous

[PeanutbutterAnd]

How can anyone be a liberal? Our border is a disaster and Biden says it's not.

[Pterodon]

I hear you. To be a liberal all you have to do is lie

[riverrat3]

Not sure, I am a liberal, I own guns, I believe in the 2nd amendment, just wish people knew what we'll regulated militia meant

[Pterodon]

A militia is armed civilians that assist a military. You can’t have armed civilians if they aren’t free to bear arms. It is well regulated. There are background checks and serial numbers and age limits. Plus felons can’t own them. Neither can medical marijuana users even if it is legal in your state no can dishonorable discharged vets nor can anyone that’s been committed

[Pterodon]

You keep leaving out “the right to bear arms shall not be infringed upon.” Part

[msc545]

Stupidly shitty question that I suppose you think is clever. It is not.

[collie22]

You could ask that a better way

[Pterodon]

Not really because it’s the truth

[collie22]

whats true?

[Pterodon]

If a conservative doesn’t like guns he doesn’t buy one but if a liberal doesn’t like guns they want them banned for everyone

[collie22]

o i get you, your thinking political labels. well i don't fit ether of those stereo types. by the way its not polite

[Pterodon]

No it has two meanings. Which are you?

[Cubus]

It is the same.