Don’t laws sometimes become obsolete?

Yes, but rights never do

Recently, I was engaged in an interesting and unexpected dialogue with a woman I had not previously met. Her daughter was trying out a class in which my daughter is also enrolled, so, while sitting in the hallway outside the room, I struck up a conversation. The girl, it turns out, was a school friend of one of the other girls in class, and the woman asked about my daughter. The discussion turned to public school, as I stated my daughter is homeschooled and I’m very glad for that considering the state of public schools, and she concurred.

Thinking this would a pleasant palaver, I mentioned my concern over curriculum. As it happens, this was not at all her concern. Her concern, as she stated it, was “social.” I figured perhaps she took issue with gender ideology being pushed not only by teachers, but through peer-pressure. Again, I was mistaken. The dialog took a quick political turn, as she finally expressed her fear of school shootings. Not a problem I thought. I can talk guns.

Though she believes school shootings to be a “multi-factor” issue, her first point was a common one: access. She believes guns are too easily accessible. I explained that there was a time when you could open a Sears catalog and order a firearm through the mail, and when kids went to school with gun racks mounted in the back windows of their pick-up trucks, guns aboard, yet school shootings were virtually unheard of. Guns are no more accessible today than they were back then. She stated it’s just too easy to order them off the Internet (another very common misconception). I said you can’t just order a firearm on the Internet - it’s not that easy. She said something to the effect that “it’s been proven…” Again, no such thing has been “proven.” But, I did not get to explain that, though items know as “80% lowers,” the foundation for much maligned “ghost guns,” could be ordered and shipped directly, contrary to many news reports (several of which actually broke the law while unsuccessfully trying to prove how easy they are to build), they require a reasonable level of skill to mill and assemble. I did not get to explain that, though firearms can be ordered online, they must ship to a federally licensed firearm dealer (FFL), where the purchaser must fill out the requisite ATF forms and undergo a background check prior to the firearm being transferred into the hands of the buyer. I did not get to explain that it is only easy to legally acquire a gun if you pass a background check. I did not get to explain any of this because I mentioned the Second Amendment and the disquisition took an unexpected and rather revealing turn.

When I brought up the phrase “shall not be infringed,” the response I received lay bare what I eventually recognized as another common, and much more disheartening, misapprehension. Her retort came in the form of a question: “Don’t laws sometimes become obsolete?” I must admit that this query caught me off guard and for a moment, I was stunned into silence, a moment during which the class ended at that moment, and so did our chat.

After she left, I further mulled her inquiry. It struck me that I also did not have opportunity to explain that she holds a misperception of laws, rights, and the Constitution shared by so many. What her interrogatory uncovered is a belief that our rights are granted by laws. I did not get to explain that nothing could be further from the truth. America’s founding fathers recognized that our rights are granted, as they stated in the Declaration of Independence, by our Creator, and that government’s purpose is to protect the “unalienable Rights” with which we are endowed. Concerned that the government might not recognize at least some of those rights they believed inherent to every person, after much debate, they drafted the Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments to the U.S. Constitution. The point was not to grant rights, but to delineate certain rights upon which the government was not to infringe. Freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion, keeping and bearing arms (of any sort - there is a reason they used the simple and vague term “arms”). They knew they could not enumerate every right, but they also knew they needed to explicitly name some that were crucial to a free country, to liberty.

Thus, the Bill of Rights was born of a desire to ensure government did their job of protecting our rights, and prevent government transgressing them. Believing the Bill of Rights grants us rights is a tragic misunderstanding of epic proportion. If we are to assume that the Second Amendment could become obsolete, that is tantamount to asserting government grants us our rights. And if government grants us our rights, government can rescind them just as easily. Right to freedom of religion? Revoked. Right to freedom of assembly? Repealed. Right to free speech? Withdrawn.

In an age when so many believe that speech itself can be violence, it is rather astounding that those same people cannot see the analogous relationship between amendments. If they wish to do away with the Second Amendment because of gun violence, then they should not be surprised when others want to void as well the First Amendment (and many do) because of speech violence. So, why not require background checks and issue permits for people to be able to speak? Because free speech is a right.

This is why we Americans, despite any discomfort, must firmly assert our rights and teach others to do the same. We cannot ask government to step on everyone’s rights because some may abuse those rights. This is where law rightly steps in. Punish the offender, not the innocent. Anytime we permit government to step beyond its bounds, to violate those laws put in place to restrain government, we further sacrifice rights. Please do not confuse rights with privileges and assume government, or the Constitution, grants us rights. The government is not the Creator; it cannot confer rights. The government can only grant privileges, and the Constitution protects our rights; like government, it does not grant them. Keep this in mind the next time you hear someone talking about wanting government to infringe our rights, then educate them. Laws may become obsolete, but rights never do.