Gun control gridlock: Why GOP lawmakers are resistant to gun reform…and why they’re wrong

(This essay was adapted for the Oklahoman on June 20, 2023.)

Last week, seven people were shot and two were killed at a graduation ceremony in Virginia where “police recovered multiple handguns”.

These headlines are far too common, yet we’ve not seen meaningful change to gun policy, because republicans in Congress remain defiant against reform. I can’t improve on the compelling arguments already made for gun control policy, but I can explain why republicans remain resistant and why they’re wrong. My hope is that articulating the core motives at play might diminish their stronghold.

Flawed principle

If you’ve spent much time around us republicans, you’ll know the conservative wing has traditionally bound itself to a set of guiding principles that serve as the true north for policy formation. Chief among them is fidelity to the Constitution. And to be clear, it’s not wrong to act on principle. In fact, there’s great value in living according to principles that define our highest values and deepest passions. In politics, principles provide a structured way to form sound opinions in the face of new or uncertain circumstances.

But this can go awry when the principles themselves are not understood correctly in the first place, rendering the actions that flow from them – or inaction in this case – strikingly at odds with common sense.

Along these lines, the reason republicans can brush off the terror of gun violence with trite proposals for greater access to guns is because they believe our party’s principles of constitutionality precludes any limitations on the Second Amendment’s right to bear arms; that any restriction on gun ownership rights is a violation of them entirely. But this crude application of principle warps the true intent of conservatism by mistakenly elevating a specific amendment, making it an end in itself, over the fundamental aims of the Constitution.

All of our laws – including the Second Amendment – were written to uphold our inalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. So any principle that would pit a specific, unabated freedom against the foundational aims of the Constitution is not constitutional at all. Over 19,000 people have been shot or killed in mass shootings since 2015, many of these indiscriminately and at random, leaving us all to wonder who will be next. Clearly, the current application of the Second Amendment with largely unfettered access to firearms has encroached on our freedoms.

Real principle

Conservative republicans are rightly skeptical of heavy-handed federal laws and regulations. But we are foolish to blindly resist new ones regardless of merit. There’s simply no virtue in being principled when the axioms upon which we hang our hats conflict with one another and value an empty mantra over saving lives.

John Stuart Mill, a forefather of modern conservatism, accounts for this in what’s known as the harm principle: The only freedom which deserves the name is that of pursuing our own good in our own way, so long as we do not attempt to deprive others of theirs or impede their efforts to obtain it. (On Liberty, John Stuart Mill, 1859).

Protecting our inalienable rights is the essence of constitutionalism and what should endure regardless of circumstance. This will, at times, require narrow limitations on specific liberties in order to secure and maximize our freedoms.

A way forward

America’s democratic experiment with ordered liberty can only be sustained insofar as the balance between security and freedom is maintained. The manifestation of good and evil morph with each generation, and the teeter and totter balance must be calibrated periodically in Congress as the nature of threats change. Achieving this requires lawmakers be guided by the principle of maximizing freedoms for law abiding citizens, such that our “blessings of liberty” are kept secure.

In this moment, we find our freedoms threatened, having endured nearly 280 mass shootings year to date. It’s obvious our inalienable rights are threatened by the excessive availability of firearms. Thus, republicans must acknowledge there can be no principled fealty to the Constitution without placing limitations on gun ownership.

Congress, in coordination with the states, should move to immediately enact these reforms:

1. Universal background checks, closing the gun show loophole
2. Ban assault rifles
3. Increase the age requirement for gun purchases from 18 to 21
4. Establish 30-day waiting period before purchase
5. Institute red flag laws

Republicans should know that passing targeted laws that prevent gun violence would strengthen the case for the Second Amendment. Without it, the current spiral of continued gun violence may well threaten the validity of gun ownership altogether in the minds of future generations. In this way, lawful gun owners should be the loudest advocates for meaningful firearm reforms.