At minimum, we must reckon honestly with whether our current interpretation of the Second Amendment promotes safety and equality, or whether it undermines both.

Equal rights under the Constitution require restraint, accountability, and consistency, not political rhetoric. If a constitutional right cannot be safely exercised without risking death at the hands of the state, we should ask whether it is functioning as a protection at all.

The killings of both legally armed men make clear that when the Second Amendment is conditional, selectively enforced, and overridden by fear, it fails the very people it claims to protect.

When lawful gun possession can be reframed as an inherent threat sufficient to justify killing someone, the Second Amendment ceases to protect life or liberty and instead becomes a rationale for escalation.

This should trouble everyone, regardless of political ideology or views on gun policy. A constitutional right that becomes a liability the moment it is exercised, particularly during encounters with law enforcement, is not being applied equally.

Like Castile, Pretti was legally licensed to carry a firearm. Like Castile, he did not brandish his weapon or threaten law enforcement. And like Castile, the mere presence of a lawful firearm was treated as justification for lethal force after the fact.

Thanks Daniel, much appreciated!