Citation

LaFollette H. Ethics 2000; 110(2): 263-281.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2000, University of Chicago Press)

DOI

10.1086/233269

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

Many of us assume that we must either oppose or support gun control. Not so. We have a range of alternatives. Even this way of speaking over- simplifies our choices since there are two distinct scales on which to place alternatives. One scale concerns the degree (if at all) to which guns should be abolished. This scale moves from those who want no abolition (NA) of any guns, through those who want moderate abolition (MA)— that is, to forbid access to some subclasses of guns—to those who want absolute abolition (AA). The second scale concerns the restrictions (if any) on those guns that are available to private citizens. This scale moves from those who want absolute restrictions (AR) through those who want moderate restrictions (MR) to those who want no restrictions (NR) at all. Restrictions vary not only in strength but also in content. We could restrict who owns guns, how they obtain them, where and how they store them, and where and how they carry them.

Our options are further complicated by the union of these scales. On one extreme no private citizen can own any guns (AA, which is func- tionally equivalent to AR), while at the other extreme, every private citi- zen can own any gun with no restrictions (NA