The current discussion on Senate Bill 11, which would allow for concealed carry license owners to bring their concealed firearms into college campus buildings in the state of Texas, brings forward two differing ideas of freedom. While laws already allow for concealed carry firearms to be carried on campuses for the past twenty years, the new law, set to go into effect on August 1, 2016, would allow them inside buildings. The bill states that only owners of a concealed carry license who are twenty-one years of age will permitted to carry firearms. The supporters of the bill argue that this will help individuals protect themselves and others in campus buildings in the event of an armed attack or other emergency situation. Opponents of the bill argue whether it is right for firearms to be allowed into the classroom. One of the strongest arguments against the bill is the effect it will have on the right of free speech in Texas college classrooms. Because of the amount of discussion that occurs in classrooms, many controversial topics are discussed. If certain certain individuals are permitted to carry a concealed weapon into class, it could lead to a situation which stifles discussion, as many might be afraid to argue with a person chatting a weapon.
Link: http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/09/us/texas-campus-carry-law/
This controversy over the effect of the bill in the classroom can be connected to Rousseau’s ideas of both civil and natural freedom that we went over in class. The supporters of the bill are looking out for the ability of individuals to protect themselves, just as a personal freedom in a state of nature would be concerned only with the needs or desires of an individual. Those who argue against the bill are thinking about the greater good of society and not just about what is best for specific individuals. In their opinion, the right of everyone to free speech is a more important one than the right to be armed in public spaces. In a state of nature one can do what one wants and thinks about themselves and their freedom, but in a civil society, you have the same freedom as others in you society. The laws that affect your freedom are meant to help the whole community rather than just the individual. A healthy civil society is able to balance the freedom of individuals with the larger freedoms of the society itself.
Max,
ReplyDeleteYou talk about two freedoms that may contradict each other posing it as civic vs. natural freedom. Is it possible that these are two types of natural freedoms that might not both be possible? That we have to decide which constraints we want and don't want?
I think that it is impossible to balance a combination of these freedoms. You cannot increase one of them without affecting the other. And once you create a civil society, it is harder for people in the society to maintain and exercise their natural freedoms to the extent that they once did.
DeleteThat's a really apt example of the general will of the people being considered over the rights of the individual. The debate over the right to firearms is a such a sticky subject because personal freedoms can sometimes go against the freedoms of the society. In this case, I think what needs to be determined is whether society will be safer if people are allowed to have weapons. There's an argument for both sides.
ReplyDeleteIt's a great example to illustrate the civil rights that people have. I think the whole process of voting, passing new senate bill, and arguing in Texas can be related to John Dewey views on civil liberty, in which democracy has to be obtained through consecutively fighting, arguing, and communicating among all the civilians.
ReplyDeleteThis does a great job of looking at and comparing both freedom in relation to the example. I think one of the main questions here is how do you evolve while still keeping your originals values? We are Americas are granted the freedom of owning a firearm, which is recent years has been highly controversial. How do we stay being a healthy civil society while still keeping the larger freedom granted to us?
ReplyDelete