REGULATION OF GUN RIGHTS
I am saddened by the tragedy at Stoneman Douglas High School. One of my friends taught for seven years at this school and personally knew four of the victims.
Regarding the repeated invocation of the Second Amendment, the US Supreme Court has struggled for more than two centuries to translate this intent into actionable precedent. A key issue is whether the right of “the people” is an individual or collective right. Historically, this right was held to be collective (eg, by a member of a militia), but in a 2008 decision, the Supreme Court affirmed that the right is bestowed on individuals. Nonetheless, the Court has continually maintained that this right is not absolute; regulation per se need not constitute infringement.
While totally sympathetic to the implementation of gun control, I believe that its advocates should change their tactics. The very word “control” is divisive. No one wants to cede control. Doing so is emasculating. Once advocates clamour for gun control, all reasoned discourse grinds to an abrupt halt. Can we instead seek “well regulated gun rights”, as suggested by the language of the Second Amendment? In that regard, three questions come to mind:
1. Should we improve gun regulation? Yes. In the latest massacre, the 19-year-old gunman had no difficulty buying an AR-15 semi-automatic rifle and multiple magazines of ammunition, despite repeated warnings about his questionable sanity and intent to the Broward County police and the FBI. Clearly the current regulatory system is flawed.
2. When should we improve gun regulation? Now. There have been a dozen gun massacres with double-digit casualties in the US over the past decade — representing more than half of such incidents in the country’s entire history.
3. How should we improve gun regulation? I don’t know. What I do know is that we need non-partisan and reasoned discussion from all sides in order to move forward. I believe that a majority of Americans feel strongly that current gun regulation is flawed and that collectively we can and should do better.
Tom Parkinson