NPR’s programming is a mixed bag of some very good reporting and some very biased reporting. One decidedly positive contribution they provide is the Intelligence Squared debate line up. A question occurred to me while watching a debate a few days ago on the Second Amendment: Who has the burden of proof as to whether confiscation or bans on guns should be enforced?
“Why does anyone need an AR-15?” is a common question heard in the gun debate. The question insinuates that no one should be allowed to possess an AR-15 unless they can somehow justify it to the government. This is exactly the wrong question. The burden of proof instead lies with the confiscator. This article is not about the merits of the pro-gun vs. anti-gun position. Rather, I simply encourage people to start with the right framework. Whoever advocates a position that bans a certain item always has the burden of proof for the policy.
If you would like more on the question of whether gun control is the right policy, decision please check out More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun-Control Laws by John R. Lott Jr. Also, Glenn Beck’s new work Control: Exposing the Truth About Guns, contains an excellent analysis of the issue.
