Aquinas on Self Defense and Free Will

Letter to the Editor on Gun Control

Dear Editor,

I am writing to express my views on the current debate surrounding gun control. As someone who has devoted my life to the study of philosophy and theology, I believe that there are certain principles that must be taken into account in any discussion of this topic.

First and foremost, we must consider the dignity of the human person. Every human being is created in the image and likeness of God, and therefore possesses an inherent value and dignity.[footnoteRef:2] This dignity must be respected at all times, even in the midst of violence. [2: Sulmasy, Daniel P. "Human dignity and human worth." In Perspectives on human dignity: A conversation, pp. 9-18. Springer, Dordrecht, 2007.]

How does human dignity bear on the issue of gun control, you might ask? Let me reiterate the point that every human being possesses a unique and irreplaceable value that must be respected. This value stems from the fact that each human being is created in the image of God and therefore has the capacity to reason and choose freely. Because human beings possess this unique value, they must be treated with respect and their lives must be protected. Life is sacred because it comes from God, and God resides in every living sul that has not deliberately rejected Him.

It would seem, therefore, that because human life is sacred, certain measures ought to be taken that would ensure its safety. Thus, one might say that the issue of gun control bears directly on the question of human dignity. After all, the availability of guns makes it all too easy for people to take the lives of others without due consideration for their inherent value. Consequently, gun control, it would appear is an important way of safeguarding human dignity and ensuring that people are treated with the respect that they deserve. By removing the availability of guns, the state provides better protection for people, ensuring the preservation of human life.

I respond to that argument by saying, on the contrary, that gun control laws actually violate the human dignity of the individual human being, by infringing upon his right to choose freely on the matter of self-defense. Life is precious, as it is given by God, through God, with God. But so too is the freedom of will precious. God did not design the human nature as it is so that the gifts that God has given might be reduced or taken away. God respects our freedom to choose, and so too should the state. God does not deny us opportunity to create problems for ourselves—but He does provide us with the means to turn away from such temptations and to find peace and refuge in Him. Thus, the state should respect what God also respects, and it should not endeavor to deny the human being the freedom to choose, even if it means the risk of choosing wrongly.

We humans are endowed with reason by God and, as such, we are capable of making moral choices. It is our capacity for reason that gives us our freedom of will – the ability to choose between right and wrong. This freedom of choice is a gift from God and should be respected by the State. If the State interfered with our freedom of choice, it would be violating our natural rights. The State should not compel us to act in a certain way, as this would interfere with our ability to make moral choices. This respect for our freedom of choice comes directly from God and it is what allows us to live in a just society, where people are free to pursue their own happiness.

But what of the risk of harm to others? What if people choose wrongly and perversely and try to use guns to kill others? For that reason, gun control is necessary—because there are bad actors who would act unjustly. A just society should guarantee protection from such bad actors by banning guns.

On the contrary, I say that a just society respects all people’s right to self-defense while protecting their right to choose between good and evil.[footnoteRef:3] For on this matter, and secondly, we must also consider the principle of self-defense. This principle is based on the natural law, which dictates that we have a duty to protect our own lives and the lives of those around us. In light of this principle, I believe that gun control is not the answer to the problem of violence in our society. [3: Buchanan, A. (2000). Rawls's law of peoples: Rules for a vanished Westphalian world. Ethics, 110(4), 697-721.]

This right to self-defense, moreover, extends to both physical and psychological self-defense. We have the right to defend ourselves against physical attack, but we also have the right to defend ourselves against emotional or mental harm. In many cases, the two are interconnected: if someone is physically attacking us, they are also likely to be causing us emotional distress. Similarly, if someone is engaging in emotional manipulation or abuse, they may also pose a physical threat. Either way, we have the right to defend ourselves as best we can. And this is both true regarding physical violence and also legislative violence, which is in the realm of governance. Those who would threaten us with denial of our fair and free usage of the will and of right reason are as much a threat to our moral and psychological well-being as those who might threaten us with physical violence. Thus, it is more than appropriate that I write this way and share these views—for they should be considered an act of self-defense.