Charles C.W. Cooke
‘Only the
cops need guns” simply could not live forever alongside, “The cops are
racist and will kill you.” And so, at long last, the two circles of the
Venn Diagram have filed for an amicable divorce. In the end, the
differences proved irreconcilable.
At least, they proved irreconcilable without descending into farce. I
have been told more times that I can count that “if you want to own an
AR-15, you should join the army or the police.” Oh, really. Why?
So that I can be pulled back when the rioting starts, lest I inflame
those wielding bricks and Molotov cocktails? So that I can be called a
fascist, acting in the service of a dictator? So that I can be part of
the problem? In light of the new fashions, these old injunctions look
rather silly, don’t they? “You don’t need 15 rounds; you’re not a cop! Also, the police are corrupt from top to bottom, and should probably be abolished.”
Pick one, perhaps?
In The New Republic, Matt Ford argues that the police were a
mistake per se. They have, Ford writes, “become the standing armies
that the Founders feared.” As it happens, unreconstructed small-r
republican that I am, I have more sympathy for this idea than many might
expect. But I’m sure as hell not going to entertain it at the same time
as I subordinate my unalienable right to bear arms to the personal
prejudices of the bureaucracy and commentariat. Don’t call the cops! Also, wait three months for a gun permit! Again: Pick one.
In any case, the idea that the existence of police officers in some
way negates the right to bear arms has always been a ridiculous one.
Police are an auxiliary force that we hire to do a particular job —
there to supplement, not to replace, my rights and
responsibilities. Every time we debate gun control in the United States,
I am informed that the Sheriff of Whatever County is opposed to
liberalization. To which I always think, “So what?” My right to
keep and bear arms is merely the practical expression of my underlying
right to self-defense. That, as a polity, we have decided to hire
certain people to take the first shot at keeping the peace is fine. But
it has no bearing on my liberties.
And how could it, given that I do not live in a police
station? The old saw that “when seconds count, the police are minutes
away” is trotted out as often as it is because it is unquestionably
true. Whether the average police department is virtuous or evil is
irrelevant here. What matters is that no government has the right — and
in America, mercifully, no government has the legal power — to farm out,
and then to abolish, my elementary rights. It would not fly if the
government hired people to speak for me and then shut down my speech; if
would not fly if the government hired people to worship for me and then
restricted my right to exercise my religion; and it will not fly for
the government to hire a security agency and then to remove, or limit,
my access to weaponry. This is a personal question, not an aggregate
question: I have one life, and I am entitled to defend it in any way I
see fit against those who would do me harm. If there is a single
principle that has animated this realm since the time of the Emperor
Justinian, it is that.
Issues of concern to people who live in the west: property rights, water rights, endangered species, livestock grazing, energy production, wilderness and western agriculture. Plus a few items on western history, western literature and the sport of rodeo... Frank DuBois served as the NM Secretary of Agriculture from 1988 to 2003. DuBois is a former legislative assistant to a U.S. Senator, a Deputy Assistant Secretary of Interior, and is the founder of the DuBois Rodeo Scholarship.
No comments:
Post a Comment