Firearms Rights and the Primary Law: United Kingdom

Abstract

The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution, which guarantees the ‘right of the people to keep and bear Arms,’ was bolstered, supposedly, by District of Columbia v. Heller (2008). Actually, Associate Justice Scalia, who wrote the majority opinion, took back as much as he gave. Implementation of the Second Amendment rights is uncertain.

When those constitutional rights (to keep arms; to bear arms) are personal, ordinary people have the means to protect themselves against criminals. The societal circumstance of armed criminals is inescapable. Criminals disregard firearms-controul laws, as they disregard all laws.

When those constitutional rights are collective, personal firearms are impossible. Ordinary people do not have any protection against criminals.

In contrast, elected officers always have protection. No matter that one law renders ordinary people defenceless, another law authorises the guarding of elected officers by armed personnel, whether police officers or security officers. Elected officers are more equal than ordinary people.

Denial of firearms to ordinary people is indicative of the antagonism of elected officers toward independent efforts. Prohibition of personal firearms is of a piece with prohibition of personal motor cars and insistence on mass transport. Elected officers are consternated by people who empower themselves, because those people are not dependent on elected officers. There is no signing up by self-empowered people for dependency-inducing governmental-assistance schemes flogged by elected officers.

Keywords: collectivism, common law, culture war, football, guns, individualism, Obama, primary law, public safety, self defence, United Nations, weapon

JEL Classification: K14, K42