As the story goes, Bob Barr was a conservative with distinct libertarian leanings, who has since become more principled in those leanings and who has come to accept libertarianism more consistently on a whole range of issues on which he once took the rightwing position. But has he changed his mind on the 2nd Amendment?
He is certainly far better on gun rights than McCain and Obama, and probably always was. But according to this, in the 1990s he proudly saved the Lautenberg gun ban, which he hailed as "strong protection for women and children," by taking away its retro-activity. As it stood before his change, in Barr's words, "the entire provision would have been declared unconstitutional. My language corrected this deficiency."
Now, liberals and Scalia would probably approve as "reasonable" a federal law that merely disarms people under a court's restraining order for domestic abuse. But such a law is not libertarian, and certainly not Constitutional under the 2nd, 9th and 10th Amendments. I hope Barr adds clarity to this and comes out against any and all federal gun laws. When asked if he supported this at the LP debate in Denver, unlike most of the other candidates who articulated the principled, abolitionist position toward all gun control laws, Barr relayed that Chuck Heston was a good friend of his — as if the NRA is libertarian on the right to bear arms. If he wants to appeal to libertarian-leaning conservatives, he had better stake out a clear position on this that decisively distances him from the vague McCainian position on the 2nd Amendment.
