For sport or self-defense?(EXERCISING THE RIGHT)(Brief article).

UCLA Law Professor Eugene Volokh takes issue with the approach of gun-control proponents to treat guns only for sporting purposes as legitimate: "And of course if that is broadly done and broadly accepted--once people buy into the notion that the legitimacy of gun use rests on its 'sporting' applications--further steps towards broader gun and ammunition bans become much easier. After all, the only thing that would be at stake in such bans would be 'sport'; how can that measure up against the supposed crime-fighting (or even accident-fighting) benefits of gun control? Why not ... ban the sport altogether, in the interests of saving lives?"

Professor Volokh identifies the strategy of the gun grabbers to reframe the debate on their terms, but no amount of wordsmithing can change the true intention of the Second Amendment. Self-defense is needed not just against individual criminals, but also to prevent the tyranny of runaway government. Our Founders understood that the right to bear arms was vital to a free society. Thomas Jefferson summed it up nicely with the following proposal for the Virginia Constitution of 1776: "No freeman shall ever be de-barred the use of arms."

Source Citation:Krey, Patrick. "For sport or self-defense?(EXERCISING THE RIGHT)(Brief article)." The New American 25.17 (August 17, 2009): 40(1). Academic OneFile. Gale. BROWARD COUNTY LIBRARY. 4 Sept. 2009
.