First Principles on Arms

It's astonishing to see even well-regarded scholars who have long backed Second Amendment rights, like John Lott here, suddenly reverse themselves. It's very solidly within the American tradition for American citizens to bear arms; to watch public servants who are engaged in exercises and report, as citizen journalists, on whether they are behaving well or badly, on whether they are obeying or breaking the laws. If you are a public servant, whether a volunteer firefighter or a police officer, you should expect people to watch you do what you do and to talk about it freely. If you misuse your power, you should expect to be held accountable. That is the American way.

Some of those people may be armed: again, this is America. If you stop by the local gas station here, you'll see at least two men with pistols on their belts on an ordinary day. They aren't criminals, they're usually employees. Has anyone ever needed to use a gun on duty? No, not once. Why? Partly because everyone knows there will be a couple of armed employees making sure you don't rob the place. We have illegal immigrants and their associated cartels here, but we don't have the chaos of Juarez. It's safe enough that they don't need the guns precisely because they have the guns. 

Lott knows all that. We all do. It's critical not to lose sight of your first principles in the moment. 

6 comments:

  1. I was really surprised by some of the comments I'm seeing in conservative / conservative leaning places. Suddenly having a duty-sized pistol, red dot sight, and 2 extra magazines means one intends to commit mass murder. It's nuts. I completely agree w/ Grim on this.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I fail to see what Lott said that was anti-2ndA. It was practical and sound advice, and pretty much what every concealed carry class teaches. Yes, many on the right who aren't gun people slip into using the language of the left in situations like this- it's why the left's control on language and messaging is such a deep problem. Certainly we should correct those. I don't think Lott is one of them here.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous10:13 AM

      Where I object to Lott's comment was where he implies carrying extra magazines is suspicious. It's not and it focuses the discussion on the wrong things.

      - Tom

      Delete
    2. He also suggested that the gentleman was pointing his weapon at the officers; in fact he never drew his weapon and was shot after being disarmed.

      Delete
    3. Op, I didn't see the second Lott tweet, and for some reason didn't recall the magazine bit. I stand corrected.

      Delete
  3. Which, by the way, I haven't raised as a complaint, only mentioned as a fact. I understand that it's hard to know what's going on in a chaotic situation, and that Monday Morning Quarterbacking shoot/no-shoot decisions isn't helpful. I'm not suggesting that the agents should be executed or sent to prison for life; but I am suggesting that there needs to be some mode of accountability for agents of the state exercising power. It can't just be masks, no names, and immunity.

    ReplyDelete