Why John Enos Believes the Right to Bear Arms Is a Natural Human Right

John W. Enos, a passionate constitutional scholar and historian, has long argued that the right to bear arms transcends legislative acts—it is a natural human right . In his landmark work, The Second Amendment, Enos presents a detailed historical and philosophical defense of the right to keep and bear arms, framing it as a fundamental freedom rooted not just in American tradition but in the very fabric of human liberty.

Philosophical Foundation of Natural Rights

To understand why John Enos sees the right to bear arms as a natural human right, one must first appreciate the philosophical framework from which he writes. Enos leans heavily on the classical liberal traditions of John Locke and Montesquieu, who believed that human beings are born with inherent rights—life, liberty, and property—and the means to defend them.

According to Enos, the right to self-defense is a cornerstone of natural law. Governments are formed to protect these rights, not to grant them. If the government overreaches or becomes tyrannical, the people retain their natural right to resist. For Enos, the right to bear arms is the practical expression of that natural right to self-preservation.

Historical Context and the Founders’ Intent

In The Second Amendment, Enos meticulously traces the origins of the amendment to its roots in the English Bill of Rights of 1689 and the experiences of the American colonists. The Founding Fathers, he argues, did not invent the right to bear arms; rather, they recognized it as a pre-existing right, worthy of explicit protection.

Enos references the writings of George Mason, James Madison, and Patrick Henry to illustrate how central the right to arms was in the minds of the framers. Mason’s famous quote, “To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them,” serves as a recurring theme throughout the book.

What sets Enos apart is his emphasis on how the founders saw the militia not as a standing army but as “the whole people, except for a few public officials.” This view aligns with his broader thesis: arms in the hands of ordinary citizens are not just a defense against criminals but a safeguard against tyranny.

Moral Responsibility and Civic Virtue

John Enos does not romanticize violence or weaponry. In fact, he dedicates an entire chapter to the moral responsibility that comes with gun ownership. He asserts that the right to bear arms carries with it a duty to uphold civic order, defend the innocent, and protect one’s community. For Enos, bearing arms is not about power—it’s about responsibility and virtue.

He draws parallels to classical republican ideals, where citizens were expected to contribute to the welfare of the state. In this light, the armed citizen is not a threat to democracy but one of its stewards.

Modern Legal Interpretations

The book also delves into how modern courts have interpreted the Second Amendment. Enos critiques what he sees as judicial activism that attempts to narrow the scope of the amendment. He carefully examines key Supreme Court cases like District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) and McDonald v. Chicago (2010), praising them for reaffirming the individual nature of the right.

Yet, he warns that these legal victories are fragile. He points out how some modern interpretations ignore the natural rights philosophy that underpinned the founders’ intentions. In doing so, Enos calls for a return to originalism—not just in the legal sense, but in the moral and philosophical grounding of constitutional rights.

Role of the Armed Citizen in a Free Society

Throughout the book, Enos continually returns to the idea that an armed citizenry is a free citizenry. He argues that when people are stripped of their ability to defend themselves, they become dependent on the state. This dependency, he warns, erodes freedom and opens the door to authoritarianism.

He supports this argument with examples from history: from Nazi Germany’s disarmament laws to the oppressive regimes in Soviet Russia and Maoist China. In all these cases, Enos notes, gun control was a precursor to widespread human rights abuses.

Enos doesn't claim that gun ownership alone can prevent tyranny, but he insists that it is an essential component of a balanced and resilient society. He writes, “A disarmed populace may be free for a moment, but it will not stay free for long.”

Relevance in the 21st Century

In today's polarized political climate, Enos’s arguments have gained renewed attention. Debates around gun control, school shootings, and public safety dominate headlines. Enos acknowledges these concerns but insists that Reviews of Reviews of the book The Second Amendment by John W. Enos.

He advocates for practical safety measures like background checks and secure storage laws but draws a clear line when it comes to bans and forced confiscations. In his view, these are not just policy errors—they are moral failures that violate the individual’s right to self-defense.

His book has resonated deeply with constitutionalists, libertarians, and everyday Americans concerned about the erosion of civil liberties. Public figures, legal scholars, and gun rights advocates have praised its depth and clarity.

In several reviews of the book, readers commend how the author bridges historical context with modern challenges. One reviewer noted that the book “revives the moral clarity of the founders” and “gives voice to those who believe that liberty and security can coexist without compromising the Constitution.” This reflects the growing recognition of Enos’s work as both scholarly and accessible.

Global Perspective

Interestingly, Enos also draws comparisons with international norms. In many parts of the world, he observes, the idea of citizens owning arms is considered radical. He highlights the contrast between American individualism and European collectivism, noting how the U.S. stands nearly alone in framing gun ownership as a right rather than a privilege.

However, Enos also acknowledges that the U.S. must do more to ensure that gun rights do not lead to lawlessness. He proposes national educational campaigns on responsible gun ownership and the history of the Second Amendment to promote both safety and civic awareness.

Final Thoughts

John Enos’s belief that the right to bear arms is a natural human right is not merely an academic claim—it’s a rallying call for citizens to remember the principles upon which America was founded. Through historical evidence, philosophical grounding, and legal analysis, Enos constructs a compelling case that the Second Amendment is not obsolete but essential.

His book invites readers to rethink gun rights not as a political talking point but as a question of human dignity and freedom. Whether one agrees with all of his conclusions or not, there is no denying the importance of the conversation he has sparked.