The 2nd amendment of U.S. constitution seems to allow Americans gun ownership. Some argue that 2nd amendment is necessary because it is a safeguard against government tyranny. This argument strikes me as false.
It seems to me that a government that cannot steer itself towards liberty through the use of checks and balances but instead has to be coerced by its gun-touting-populous away from tyrannical rule is not worth having. The argument for gun access to safeguard liberal democracy is an argument against liberal democracy.
Liberal democracy’s nature is self-sustaining, through peaceful measures and voluntary agreement of all. Faults of government are exposed by the free press, by other branches of government and punished by an independent judiciary where appropriate. The system has accountability and oversight. To say that liberal democracy can only be sustained by an armed and angry mob is to deny this nature of liberal democracy. But this nature is undeniable. Liberal democratic process is flourishing in many places around the World where gun ownership is curtailed or even banned. Example of UK comes to mind.
The argument for ownership of guns to protect liberal democracy thus flows from faulty premises, namely that liberal democracy is sustainable only through gun-touting-mob. A separation of arguments for gun ownership and maintenance of liberal democracy is called for.
It seems to me that a government that cannot steer itself towards liberty through the use of checks and balances but instead has to be coerced by its gun-touting-populous away from tyrannical rule is not worth having. The argument for gun access to safeguard liberal democracy is an argument against liberal democracy.
Liberal democracy’s nature is self-sustaining, through peaceful measures and voluntary agreement of all. Faults of government are exposed by the free press, by other branches of government and punished by an independent judiciary where appropriate. The system has accountability and oversight. To say that liberal democracy can only be sustained by an armed and angry mob is to deny this nature of liberal democracy. But this nature is undeniable. Liberal democratic process is flourishing in many places around the World where gun ownership is curtailed or even banned. Example of UK comes to mind.
The argument for ownership of guns to protect liberal democracy thus flows from faulty premises, namely that liberal democracy is sustainable only through gun-touting-mob. A separation of arguments for gun ownership and maintenance of liberal democracy is called for.
No comments:
Post a Comment