Thursday, March 10, 2011

Democracy and Gun Rights

A number of countries around the world have established Gun Rights as a constitutional right. Some people are not aware of the grave importance of Gun Rights for any true democracy. In my opinion, without Gun Rights no real democracy can exist. And this statement goes beyond an opinion, but is a necessary conclusion of any reasonable person who understands the meaning of democracy and the dynamics of the real world.

Gun Rights are not just constitutional rights but rather a result of deep understanding of Human Rights, specifically the right to exist, also known as the right to life. Self-defense is the concept that emerges when the right to exist is asserted. Any organism that lacks the ability to defend itself from predators will perish.

At the international politics level, the right of a country to own a military army is well established. It stands to reason that a country that lacks a military army cannot sustain itself. So, it can be seen without ambiguity that the right to own a military army is intrinsically associated with its right to exist.

Wars and armed conflicts are generally frowned upon events. Many people have died in wars, and it would be really nice if there was an international law that bans all countries from owning a military army. Don't you agree? Wouldn't it be nice to have a world where no country has an army? Where all wars come to an end and become a thing of the past?

Unfortunately, it stands to reason that if you agree with the proposal above that you are an idiot! A bill to have countries without armies is equivalent to a doomsday device, with a death toll that might reach phenomenal numbers. Because all it takes is one rebellious country that creates a military army and it would invade all other defenseless countries, creating military dictatorships around the world.

So, we have established that the right of a country to own a military army is really part of its right to exist and have independence. This point is usually non-controversial. However, the claim that civilians within a country to have the right to own firearms is not recognized. My arguments lies on two relatively uncontroversial pillars, the result of which inevitably leads to Gun Rights.

The right to exist is generally considered as a human right, and this right alone gives every human a right to own firearms which is necessary for him to defend himself against any threats.

The second pillar is that of democracy. Almost every democratic constitution states that the people are the source of all the power of the state. Legislative, executive, and judicial are the three powers of the state, and the people are the source of those powers. It stands to reason that within a true democracy, the claim that the people are the government is non-controversial. As a matter of fact, this is what it means to have a democratic government.

However, democracy is one form of government. Dictatorship and Tyranny are some of the forms of government that might be competing with democracy to rule. And since in a democratic nation the people are the government, it is part of the right to exist for that government to own the means to defend itself. Those means are Gun Rights. It stands to question how a constitution of democracy asserts that the people are the source of the powers of the state without giving those people the power to defend themselves from threats to their government. Such a constitution is weak, and just like a country without an army would most certainly perish, a democracy without Gun Rights would most certainly perish!

Of course the problem of security and violence comes to mind, however this type of thinking bears dangerous resemblance to the idea of countries without military armies. A simpleton might see merit to gun control, but short-sightedness prevents them from seeing the more dangerous consequences of gun control. The consequences of gun control is giving up the right to exist, and the right to have a democratic government. Both of which are reasonable and legitimate demands.

In reality, gun control only prevents honest law abiding citizens from obtaining the means to defend themselves, while corrupt governments, mobsters, terrorists, and firearms dealers have access to firearms. Gun control gives the 'bad guys' access to the means through which they can terrorize people, while the honest and law abiding citizens remain defenseless. This is a situation that non-democratic governments have incentive to keep as status quo.

No comments: