08 December 2015
On Prohibiting Guns to Those on the No Fly List
The No Fly List is an often incompetently compiled list which does not follow the judicial procedures that are a necessary protection of individual rights. It denies individuals the right to travel by air with the false claim that one does not have a right to travel by air. It is claimed that travel is just a privilege which government can revoke at its whim.
This is not true. The right to travel is a very fundamental right. Just as no one has the obligation to provide us with happiness, no one is obliged to enable our travel. But, no one is justified in preventing our traveling with the use of force or the threat of force so long as we do so without hurting anyone else. Before one's right to travel can be abridged, there must be a judicial determination that one has a history of initiating the use of force or that one has plans to do so.
The right to bear arms is an explicitly guaranteed right in our Bill of Rights. The Second Amendment to the Constitution specifically recognizes this right to own arms. Obama's call to prevent the sale of arms and the possession of arms to those on the No Fly List is highly irrational. I am sure it seems to make sense to many Americans, but it does not.
Only those who have established felony histories can be denied their Second Amendment right to bear arms. This means those who are deprived of their gun rights have been first evaluated by our judiciary as a reasonable threat to others should they be allowed to own a gun. But note what Obama is doing to undermine this basic right guaranteed in our Bill of Rights: He is denying this right on the basis of a list made in denial of a travel right without a proper judicial review of those denied this right. In his own terms, he is using the revocation of what he calls a privilege to justify the revocation of an individual right protected in our Bill of Rights. The downgrade of our travel rights is being used as a basis to downgrade a right protected in our Constitution.
Even in the Articles of Confederation, the right to travel from one state to another was recognized. Many court cases decided under the Constitution have also recognized this right to travel. Yet since 9/11, this right has been denied, especially in air travel. Now we see once again how the violation of one right is used to justify the violation of another individual right.
This is not true. The right to travel is a very fundamental right. Just as no one has the obligation to provide us with happiness, no one is obliged to enable our travel. But, no one is justified in preventing our traveling with the use of force or the threat of force so long as we do so without hurting anyone else. Before one's right to travel can be abridged, there must be a judicial determination that one has a history of initiating the use of force or that one has plans to do so.
The right to bear arms is an explicitly guaranteed right in our Bill of Rights. The Second Amendment to the Constitution specifically recognizes this right to own arms. Obama's call to prevent the sale of arms and the possession of arms to those on the No Fly List is highly irrational. I am sure it seems to make sense to many Americans, but it does not.
Only those who have established felony histories can be denied their Second Amendment right to bear arms. This means those who are deprived of their gun rights have been first evaluated by our judiciary as a reasonable threat to others should they be allowed to own a gun. But note what Obama is doing to undermine this basic right guaranteed in our Bill of Rights: He is denying this right on the basis of a list made in denial of a travel right without a proper judicial review of those denied this right. In his own terms, he is using the revocation of what he calls a privilege to justify the revocation of an individual right protected in our Bill of Rights. The downgrade of our travel rights is being used as a basis to downgrade a right protected in our Constitution.
Even in the Articles of Confederation, the right to travel from one state to another was recognized. Many court cases decided under the Constitution have also recognized this right to travel. Yet since 9/11, this right has been denied, especially in air travel. Now we see once again how the violation of one right is used to justify the violation of another individual right.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment