What advocates say scathingly of the police – “when every second counts, the police are only minutes away” – is often true of these third party defenders. The central claims of advocates ought to apply most forcefully to people in these conditions. It seems that such people, who are in constant danger of being attacked or killed, would be safer if they had guns to protect themselves and that the state violates their rights of self-defense by preventing them from having guns and confiscating guns from any who might acquire them.
I think, however, that this is false. Contemporary moral philosophers are noted, or perhaps notorious, for their use of hypothetical examples. The example I have just sketched is hypothetical. But it describes the conditions in an actual institution: prison.
Tuesday, April 21, 2015
A Philosophical Challenge to So-Called Gun Rights
A Challenge to Gun Rights | Practical Ethics: