Gun Control

Sunday, November 4, 2018
First Aired:
Sunday, March 27, 2016

What Is It

The right to bear arms, as guaranteed by the Second Amendment, is at once both distinctly American and highly controversial. Incidents such as the Sandy Hook school shooting force the nation to think hard about how the law should balance gun ownership with the risk these deadly weapons present to society. What kind of right is the right to bear arms, if it is a right at all? What responsibilities ought to come with gun ownership? And what can philosophical thinking contribute to such delicate policy decisions? John and Ken stand their ground with Hugh LaFollette from the University of South Florida, author ofIn Defense of Gun Control.

Listening Notes

The topics of gun rights and gun control are some of the most vociferous in the country today, but controversy does little to deter philosophers: in this episode, John and Ken weigh in on the ethics of gun control. Ken asks how widespread ownership of killing machines advances the public good. John answers with the text of the Second Amendment: the right to bear arms is necessary to the preservation of a free state. Beyond that, John argues that the right to bear arms is part of the right one has to self-defense—a right Ken acknowledges exists. But Ken argues—like John Locke—that a citizen in a social contract places the right and responsibility of self-defense in the hands of the state.

To better understand the history gun laws in the United States, John and Ken hand things off to Shuka Kalantari, who files the weeks Roving Philosophical Report (see below). After Shuka files the Report, John and Ken welcome guest Hugh Lafollette onto the show. Professor Lafollette tells the hosts how they have to consider the lack of empirical evidence and intense political debates before they move on to the philosophical issues at hand.

三人稍作休息,讨论了公民拥有枪支的权利。Ken says there are three ways of thinking: you can argue (like Ken), that citizens have no rights to own guns, that citizens have afundamentalright to own guns, or that citizens have a derived right to own guns (which means that the owning guns is a way to protect one’s fundamental rights). Professor Lafollette argues that the right to bear arms is a derived right—either from a citizen’s right to freedom or to self-defense. After another break, the guests start talking about gun rights in American history, and then welcome caller questions from the radio audience, who ask questions about the feasibility of gun control and the role of gun manufactures in the gun control debate. The three then spend the final segment discussing what a completely rational—but perhaps impossible—system of gun control look like in a society.

  • Roving Philosophical Report (seek to 6:43):Shuka Kalantari looks into the actual history of the Wild West—where gun laws were, in reality, surprisingly strict. She also talks to historians to learn about how gun ownership was used to enforce the institution of slavery, how the Ku Klux Klan used guns in their campaign of racial terror, and how the Black Panthers used guns in their self-defense campaigns in the 70s.
  • Sixty-Second Philosopher (seek to 3:49):Ian Sholes talks about how Americans are even more stupid than usual when it comes to debates about guns—he presages that we’re heading towards a world where toddlers are all armed to the teeth (erm, gums?) and drivers fire their rifles instead of honking their horns.

Transcript

Comments(2)


Harold G. Neuman's picture

Harold G. Neuman

Sunday, October 28, 2018 -- 12:34 PM

I have not seen much good

I have not seen much good happening on this issue since 2016. So, there is really nothing I can think of to add.

Harold G. Neuman's picture

Harold G. Neuman

Tuesday, October 30, 2018 -- 11:09 AM

This morning (on morning TV),

今天早上在电视上,我看到并听到一位女士正在竞选成为美国第一位黑人女州长。我以前不知道从来没有黑人女州长。所以,我感到羞耻。总之,她被问及了几个关于她的竞选活动的问题,当然还有枪支管制(我不会因为透露她想成为州长的州而对任何人产生偏见)。她对枪支管制问题的回应很有趣。她讲述了自己如何在很小的时候就学会射击和狩猎,并且是第二修正案权利的坚定支持者。当被问及攻击性武器(AR 15等)时,她似乎犹豫了一会儿。然后她宣称,只要有确保问责和责任的规定,她不会反对人们拥有这类武器。与支持枪支的许多人一样,她似乎两全其美。她显然不希望失去潜在的选票,同时指出她的对手违反了一些法律,并被起诉了不止一次。 Hedging her bets was expected behavior, because she really wants that gubernatorial post, and probably has a good shot at it (so to speak).

Business as usual? Of course. This is how things work. Those who attempt to drain swamps cannot help but get a bit muddy. And those alligators? ---toothy.