Encryption and Guns

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

Much has been written about the right to keep and bear arms in modern society, and the great divide been the ‘pro-gun, NRA supporting, semi-automatic weapon, open-carry supporters’ on one side, and the ‘that’s not what the 2nd amendment means, we need more controls and regulation and fewer guns’ on the other.

This is not more of the same writing. Instead I want to go back to the heart of the 2nd amendment, and the need (as perceived at the time) of the people to bear arms and form a Militia if needed, to keep the government in check. In todays world, the debate shouldn’t be centered around guns, since I think the collection of nuclear weapons and other aspects of modern warfare quite outclass anything the NRA has up it’s sleeves, semi-automatic or not. Instead I believe the debate should be centered on encryption and privacy. Both current front runners in the 2016 election (Trump and Clinton at time of writing) are denouncing free speech, encryption and privacy as the tools of terrorists. Presumably staunch government supporters during the time of the writing of the constitution denounced guns in a similar fashion.

A right to strong encryption, secure and private conversation with no backdoors are todays modern day equivalent of the 2nd amendments right to bare arms. With the power of modern communication, a thought, an idea is far more powerful than a gun, and far more likely to displace one government with the next. No wonder certain leaders are frightened of it and attempt to remove it at all cost.

We need a new amendment, paralleling the 2nd, which entitles all citizens to secure communication amongst each other, without prying from the government, NSA or any other unintended recipient. Only then will the intent of the founding fathers — that government can be kept in check by the people it purports to goven — be maintained.