Screen Shot 2016-08-01 at 10.17.00 AM

Nationally, there is a push for increased regulations on legal gun ownership. One of the central premises of this push is that people don’t need particular types of guns such as semi-automatic rifles. I find that premise to be fundamentally flawed. Let me explain why.

We are being asked to agree to legislation that restricts our constitutionally protected rights. The burden of proving need doesn’t fall on us, it falls on the government to justify that restriction. Historically, Americans have enacted legislation that restricts their rights because of the perception it will make them safer or more secure. Now I’m not saying I think that’s okay, but if we use history as our guide, the data has to support the assertion that restricting this right in this way will make us significantly safer.

That’s irrational and is a result of the media and our politicians engaging in inflammatory rhetoric that is meant to instill an overinflated fear of semi-automatic rifles in Americans. Restricting our access to semi-automatic rifles will not make a statistically significant impact on our safety and security. Even more concerning is that as a society we have willingly accepted the premise that we should have to justify exercising our constitutional rights.