Can Libertarian Paternalism Change Our Gun Culture?

How can the government change the framework of choices that particular people are faced with so that their own small errors in risk perception don’t expose the whole of society?

 

Can Libertarian Paternalism Change Our Gun Culture?

What is to be done about gun violence in America? 


Few people believe that stricter gun laws alone are the answer. After all, those laws would need to be backed up by stronger enforcement. Multiple other issues also need to be addressed, such as how to create better access to mental health care and how to promote better gun safety. In short, if we want to reduce gun violence, we need to effectively change the way we behave as a culture. 

So what is to be done? The legal scholar Cass Sunstein has developed an approach to regulation that may be a good place to start. 

Before we discuss Sunstein's concept of "libertarian paternalism," let's be clear about one thing as it relates to guns. Sunstein is outspoken in his belief that the Second Amendment does not guarantee the right to have firearms nor does it prohibit Congress from passing gun control legislation. In a recent Bloomberg column, Sunstein argues that the Second Amendment has arisen as an obstacle to sensible gun control legislation only recently. Even the conservative Supreme Court Justice Warren Burger, Sunstein points out, once said the Second Amendment "has been the subject of one of the greatest pieces of fraud -- I repeat the word ‘fraud’ -- on the American public by special interest groups that I have ever seen in my lifetime.”

Sunstein, who suggested taking guns away from hunters in what Politifact described as a deliberately "provocative" address at Harvard University in 2007, has laid his cards on the table. Will Congress follow suit and pass stricter gun control policies in the aftermath of the horrific mass shooting at an Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut? Most likely not. 

And so, setting aside the issue of gun control as it has been framed in our contemporary discourse, what else can the government do to promote safe and responsible behavior?

What's the Big Idea?

While he left his post as the head of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs this past summer, Sunstein remains one of the most influential legal scholars of his generation. His ideas -- which apply behavioral economics to public policy -- are highly nuanced, and often make both libertarians and liberals nervous in equal measure.

Sunstein, along with co-author Richard Thaler, defines libertarian paternalism as follows:

Libertarian paternalism is a weak, soft, and non-intrusive type of paternalism because choices are not blocked, fenced off, or significantly burdened…Still the approach we recommend does count as paternalistic, because private and public choice architects are not merely trying to track or implement people’s choices. Rather, they are self-consciously attempting to move people in directions that will make their lives better. They nudge.

In other words, the government can present a "framework of choices" to correct "errors in risk perception." At the Nantucket Project, a festival of ideas held on Nantucket, Massachusetts, Sunstein delivered a spirited defense of this model for regulation. 

Watch the video here:

No, the Yellowstone supervolcano is not ‘overdue’

Why mega-eruptions like the ones that covered North America in ash are the least of your worries.

Ash deposits of some of North America's largest volcanic eruptions.

Image: USGS - public domain
Strange Maps
  • The supervolcano under Yellowstone produced three massive eruptions over the past few million years.
  • Each eruption covered much of what is now the western United States in an ash layer several feet deep.
  • The last eruption was 640,000 years ago, but that doesn't mean the next eruption is overdue.
Keep reading Show less

CRISPR: Can we control it?

The potential of CRISPR technology is incredible, but the threats are too serious to ignore.

Videos
  • CRISPR (Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats) is a revolutionary technology that gives scientists the ability to alter DNA. On the one hand, this tool could mean the elimination of certain diseases. On the other, there are concerns (both ethical and practical) about its misuse and the yet-unknown consequences of such experimentation.
  • "The technique could be misused in horrible ways," says counter-terrorism expert Richard A. Clarke. Clarke lists biological weapons as one of the potential threats, "Threats for which we don't have any known antidote." CRISPR co-inventor, biochemist Jennifer Doudna, echos the concern, recounting a nightmare involving the technology, eugenics, and a meeting with Adolf Hitler.
  • Should this kind of tool even exist? Do the positives outweigh the potential dangers? How could something like this ever be regulated, and should it be? These questions and more are considered by Doudna, Clarke, evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins, psychologist Steven Pinker, and physician Siddhartha Mukherjee.

Smartly dressed: Researchers develop clothes that sense movement via touch

Measuring a person's movements and poses, smart clothes could be used for athletic training, rehabilitation, or health-monitoring.

Technology & Innovation

In recent years there have been exciting breakthroughs in wearable technologies, like smartwatches that can monitor your breathing and blood oxygen levels.

Keep reading Show less
Personal Growth

Do you worry too much? Stoicism can help

How imagining the worst case scenario can help calm anxiety.

Quantcast