The article centers on the recent announcement mandating Real IDs for domestic air travel, sparking significant public outcry. While the author expresses ambivalence, they highlight the selective outrage, pointing out the financial burden on poorer Americans.
A key argument presented is that those complaining about the Real ID burden for air travel should also address similar difficulties faced by gun owners, particularly in states like California and New York with stringent permit requirements. The author emphasizes that while there's no constitutional right to air travel, there is a right to bear arms, and current regulations restrict this right disproportionately.
The article argues that the government's regulation of private entities like airlines is an established practice, highlighting the contrast between the restrictions on air travel and the greater burden on exercising Second Amendment rights. It points out that obtaining a Real ID is simpler than obtaining a permit for many firearms in several states.
The piece also critiques Fred Guttenberg, a prominent gun control advocate, for his remarks on the issue, highlighting his apparent lack of understanding of firearm purchasing regulations, which often require similar identification.
In essence, the article uses the Real ID debate to highlight the perceived hypocrisy in the treatment of different civil liberties, arguing that the burdens on exercising the Second Amendment far outweigh those related to air travel.
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem announced that, as of today, a Real ID would be needed to fly anywhere in the country. This has been coming for ages now, but there are still a lot of people very upset about it.
I'm mostly ambivalent on the topic myself because I didn't have a choice about getting one, but many screaming about them seem a tad selective in their outrage.
See, there are a lot of arguments against this out there, but one is that these requirements are burdensome and problematic for poorer Americans.
Of course, as someone who has lived more than a little lean in the income department for a good chunk of my adult life, I'm not entirely sure where poor folks are flying to and from because tickets on flights aren't exactly cheap most of the time.
Yet there's something else that seems to raise some questions about that line of reasoning, and that was framed pretty well by Second Amendment attorney Kostas Moros.
Real ID for air travel seems an odd requirement, but I totally support it being required for voting in federal elections.
And anyone who whines about that being too much of a burden that could disenfranchise poor people must first explain their stance on CA or NY CCW policies.…
— Kostas Moros (@MorosKostas) April 13, 2025
Or, we could probably add the burden of getting a semi-automatic with a detachable magazine – which is most of them – which will become the norm in Colorado very soon.
There is no constitutionally protected right to take a flight. Yes, you have the freedom to travel between the states, but there's no absolute right to access whatever means of travel you want. Especially as planes, trains and automobiles are all private property, and unless you have one of your own, you have no right to automatically access some means to travel owned by someone else.
I'm not thrilled at the idea of the government telling private entities who they can and cannot admit on their vehicles, of course, but that ship set sail long ago.
Yet, while there's no constitutionally protected right to board a plane, there is one to keep and bear arms.
Bearing arms means carrying them, which California and New York, among others, make as burdensome as humanly possible. Those requirements go well beyond getting a particular type of ID that not just lets you board a plane but also do everything else you'll need an ID for.
If anyone asks why we think the Second Amendment is treated as a second-class right, this is why. This right here.
Of course, anti-gun crusader Fred Guttenberg tried to turn this in't a slam dunk in the other direction:
— Fred Guttenberg (@fred_guttenberg) April 13, 2025
He ignores the fact that Real IDs are the norm in many states and that you do, in fact, have to show ID when buying a firearm from a licensed gun dealer. If you don't have that, then you'll need a passport. In other words, this kind of shows how little even a prominent gun control advocate actually knows about buying a gun.
Then again, Fred isn't very bright.
Neither are some of the people losing their minds about the whole Real ID thing, though.
Skip the extension — just come straight here.
We’ve built a fast, permanent tool you can bookmark and use anytime.
Go To Paywall Unblock Tool