Gun Rights?

Since when do guns have rights? After every assault gun massacre, like the one that killed 17 students and teachers in Florida in February 2018, the mantra begins: keep our gun rights. But guns don’t have rights. Only people (and perhaps other living beings) can have rights. Rights are fundamental norms that let us know what is and is not permissible. Inanimate objects do not have rights. Since they are inanimate objects, guns do not have rights.

The ‘gun rights’ conversation too often supersedes the rights of people as they are laid out in the US’s Declaration of Independence. In particular, ‘gun rights’ override the ‘unalienable rights’ that all US citizens are supposed to have. Rights to ‘life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness’ are the ones that the US government is supposed to protect. Indiscriminately allowing private ownership of military assault rifles that can be used to massacre innocent school children, concert goers, workers, dancers, travelers, and other people going about their day-to-day activities, tramples those most fundamental rights to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. When killing machines meant only for warfare can be owned by just about anyone—and, when those ‘anyones’ can use those weapons to take away the rights of others to live, citizens actual rights are being trampled—and they are not being properly protected by their government.

Freedom does not mean that I can do things that harm you. Restrictions on freedoms prevent serious harm to others or self—they are protections. Protecting children is why we limit the use of alcohol and cigarettes to adults. Protecting other drivers is why motor vehicle laws tell us what safe driving looks like. Protecting people is why fire regulations demand push bars on exit doors in public places and why there are safety codes on buildings. Such laws protect us from harms that others might do, inadvertently or deliberately. Laws protect peoples’ rights to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness with the caveat that they cannot harm others in the process.

That is why commonsense measures to restrict access to military and other weapons of mass destruction make sense. To protect people from others who would do harm. There are no ‘rights’ for guns. Guns are not human. Even if they were, guns are not alike. It is one thing to own a gun for hunting (especially if you need the food that hunting can provide). It is entirely another thing for a civilian to own a military style assault weapon. Its only purpose is to kill people—and to do so in the most devastating possible way.

The Constitution and Amendments only grant rights and protections to people. Some rights, like the fundamental rights to live and to do so with a variety of freedoms are arguably more important than the ‘rights’ of guns, even the rights of people to all types of guns. The Constitution protects freedom of speech, press, religion, protects people from unreasonable searches, protects the right to due process, to vote, and to have equal protection under the law, among other protections. The right to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness means that no one should be randomly able to take my—or your—life simply because they want to own and use a weapon of mass destruction. The reasoning is the same as that behind why we have libel laws, why we protect due process, and have abolished slavery.

Guns do not have rights.