Of all the civil liberties we have in this nation, none are quite so maligned at our gun rights, the right to keep and bear arms. While pretty much all of our rights are under some degree of attack these days, those involving firearms have been under fire (pun fully intended) for decades.
President Joe Biden has made it at least one of his missions to infringe upon those rights, too.
But a USA Today editorial board ( seems to suggest that the president try to address violent crime in New York without infringing on people’s rights.
Now, though, Democrats in power from the White House to state capitols to Gracie Mansion in New York City, are attempting some very tricky trapeze maneuvers in trying to balance their commitments to police reform as a tool to achieve racial justice while also channeling resources to police agencies to address an alarming rise in gun violence.
In a conversation with the USA TODAY Network New York Editorial Board late last month, Gov. Kathy Hochul said that curbing the violence was a top priority — even as police agencies must continue to do better engaging with communities of color.
Obviously, it’s critical that elected officials work to make our communities safe — and we expect them to do so.
They must avoid the false choice, however, that tamping down crime means violating civil rights or disrespecting the people who live in the neighborhoods most affected by crime. It is quite possible, and necessary, to improve public safety while also addressing social injustice and systemic racism.
Now, this was written by “USA TODAY Network Atlantic Group Editorial Board,” so not the main editorial board, to be sure. Regardless, this is refreshing to hear them say.
Oh, I get the standard newspaper stuff about “social injustice” and “systemic racism” are going to be in there, but seeing them call on addressing crime without violating people’s civil rights.
Sure, they probably were thinking about “stop and frisk” or other controversial measures, but the right to keep and bear arms is a civil right as well. Plus, they didn’t actually call for gun control, which alone is a novel change of pace.
So, absent any other information, one should probably assume they’re arguing that gun control isn’t really necessary to address violent crime.
I, unsurprisingly, agree.
It’s just downright refreshing to see an editorial board associated with USA Today make that case for me. Normally, I’d be forced to tell them why they’re treating our gun rights as second-class rights, but this time they don’t differentiate or call for gun control, so it sure looks like they’re including all our civil liberties in there.
If not, well, that’s what they get for not being clear.
As it stands, I’m going to roll with my own interpretation, because that’s sure as hell what newspapers should be arguing when it comes to rights.
Freedom of the press stands on equal ground with the Second Amendment, as they’re written. It’s only a matter of time before the tyrants turn from our guns and start looking at the media. Hell, to some degree, they already are.