While the Second Amendment is most often characterized as a right, there are characteristics of the guarantee that imbue separate, equally potent powers to the American people.

In many way, the right to bear arms is an insurance policy, more than a right.  It exists not for hunting, sport, or self defense, but rather as a reminder that we must remain vigilant against those who rise into power.  American politicians and government agencies cannot overstep their bounds, or impose even the slightest inkling of authoritarian rule, without first considering what the true power of an armed and free populace could be.

If free speech is taken away, the Second Amendment is there to bring it back.  If someone attempts to infringe on the right to bear arms itself, the Second Amendment activates, in a way, forcing the American people into taking responsibility for their own sovereignty.

Giving future dictators a path toward nullifying this right, this insurance policy, is an unpopular idea among those who possess a broad and historical perspective on the issue of freedom.

And that’s why President Trump’s latest push to enact so-called “red flag” laws is risky.

Senator Lindsey Graham expressed the President’s willingness to embrace the controversial idea during an appearance on Fox News.

Graham said, “I think there’s a determination by the president to act this time to create a grant program at the federal level to help local law enforcement to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people. … I’ve never seen the president this determined, quite frankly. I think he’s determined to do two things: to make sure that people who are suffering mental health problems, who are dangerous and — to themselves and others, that we act before they use the gun, and that we enhance background checks in a way that makes common sense. I think there’s bipartisan support for this.”

The concerns should be self-evident, but are obscured by the fog of grief currently hovering over the nation.

Should these “red flag” laws exist, then it will be some government agency who determines what your mental state is, and whether owning a gun is appropriate for you.  Should the government itself begin to turn toward tyranny, those who work to expose this could be labeled “conspiracy theorists”, or deemed “mentally unstable”, and have their Second Amendment rights stripped.

Worse still is the fact that these laws won’t go away.  We haven’t had an airline-involved terror attack in America in nearly 18 years, but the TSA is still groping women, children, and the elderly at airports.  In both cases, we are fighting the symptoms of a problem and not the problem itself, thus further breeding authoritarian constructs into our already bloated federal government.

Trump’s reelection chances in 2020 could very well hinge on his ability to navigate the mass shooting epidemic in America, while avoiding the pitfalls of nullifying our freedom insurance.