Progressives should support gun rights

Wow. I couldn't believe I was still on the Daily Kos — a leading progressive blog — when I came across a great post: "Why liberals should love the Second Amendment."

Kaili Joy Gray persuasively argued that just as liberals support other individual rights in the Constitution, the right to possess guns should be added to the progressive agenda.

All of our rights, even the ones enumerated in the Bill of Rights,
are restricted. You can't shout "Fire!" in a crowd. You can't threaten
to kill the president. You can't publish someone else's words as your
own. We have copyright laws and libel laws and slander laws. We have the
FCC to regulate our radio and television content. We have plenty of
restrictions on our First Amendment rights.

But we don't like them. We fight them. Any card-carrying member of
the ACLU will tell you that while we might agree that certain
restrictions are reasonable, we keep a close eye whenever anyone in
government gets an itch to pass a new law that restricts our First
Amendment rights. Or our Fourth. Or our Fifth, Sixth, or Eighth.

We complain about free speech zones. The whole country is supposed to
be a free speech zone, after all. It says so right in the First
Amendment.

But when it comes further restrictions on the manufacture, sale, or
possession of firearms, liberals are not even silent; they are
vociferously in favor of such restrictions.

Suddenly, overly broad restrictions are "reasonable." The Chicago and
Washington D.C. bans on handguns — all handguns — is
reasonable, even though the Supreme Court has now said otherwise.

The post already has gotten over 1000 comments. I only scrolled through the first couple of dozen or so. It wasn't all that surprising to see that many lefties agreed with Gray's pro-gun sentiments.

I sure do. Back in 2006 I wrote "Progressives own guns too," noting:

I don’t think that gun policy should be high on the progressive agenda.
Or probably, anywhere on it. I’m in favor of controlling assault weapons
and other guns that aren’t designed for hunting or personal defense.
But otherwise people should be able to freely buy and own guns.

Maybe the Daily Kos post will stimulate debate in the progressive community about the wisdom of not fully supporting the Supreme Court's recent interpretation that the Second Amendment is an individual right to keep and bear arms, and states/counties can't unreasonably restrict this right.

It comes down to a simple question: What's wrong with lawfully owning a gun? Yes, I understand that statistically people are more likely to be injured or killed if a gun is in the house.

But just as the First Amendment guarantees citizens the right to express disagreeable opinions, so does the Second Amendment guarantee them the right to own a dangerous weapon.