CNN Interviews National Review’s David French about a Gun Control Measure Conservatives and Liberals Might Like

Last updated on: February 20, 2018 at 12:22 am by Martha English

CNN Interviews National Review’s David French about a Gun Control Measure Conservatives and Liberals Might Like 2018-02-20T00:22:51-05:00 Martha English

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Believe it or not, there is an evidence-based process for temporarily denying a troubled person access to guns. CNN’s S.E. Cupp asked National Review’s David French to discuss it.

National Review’s @DavidAFrench joins @secupp to discuss a gun control measure he thinks conservatives should consider. https://t.co/9TTrOVwMMl

— SE Cupp Unfiltered (@UnfilteredSE) February 20, 2018

In his original piece, French writes about the discrepancy between liberals and conservatives on the topic of guns and the 2nd Amendment:

Among conservatives, there is the broad belief that the right to own a weapon for self-defense is every bit as inherent and unalienable as the right to speak freely or practice your religion. It’s a co-equal liberty in the Bill of Rights, grounded not just in the minds of the Founders but in natural law.

Against this backdrop, most forms of gun control proposed after each mass killing represent a collective punishment. The rights of the law-abiding are restricted with no real evidence that these alleged “common sense” reforms will prevent future tragedies in any meaningful way.

Many progressives, however, simply don’t care about restrictions on gun ownership. They don’t view it as an individual right, much less an unalienable one. To them, the Second Amendment is an embarrassment, an American quirk that should be limited and confined as much as possible. To them, gun ownership is a privilege, not a right, and can be heavily regulated and restricted without doing any violence at all to individual liberty.

He proposed a solution that might actually satisfy both sides:

What if, however, there was an evidence-based process for temporarily denying a troubled person access to guns? What if this process empowered family members and others close to a potential shooter, allowing them to “do something” after they “see something” and “say something”? I’ve written that the best line of defense against mass shootings is an empowered, vigilant citizenry. There is a method that has the potential to empower citizens even more, when it’s carefully and properly implemented.

It’s called a gun-violence restraining order, or GVRO.

While there are various versions of these laws working their way through the states (California passed a GVRO statute in 2014, and it went into effect in 2016), broadly speaking they permit a spouse, parent, sibling, or person living with a troubled individual to petition a court for an order enabling law enforcement to temporarily take that individual’s guns right away. A well-crafted GVRO should contain the following elements (“petitioners” are those who seek the order, “the respondent” is its subject).

Click through to read more about the possible solution.

Image Credit: Screen Cap

Previous Post

February 19, 2018

NPR Interviews David French about His Piece on Gun-Violence Restraining Order

Next Post

February 20, 2018 TrumpDating.com Helps MAGA Supporters to Find True Love

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Uncategorized

Select a Month July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 September 2016 August 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

True or False: Paul instructs the Philippians to do everything without grumbling or arguing.

Select your answer to see how you score.

FALSE TRUE