We’ve already seen plenty of wits on Twitter argue that guns should be banned because they infringe on other people’s right to life. Look, here’s one now:

Fortunately, the ACLU isn’t quite making that argument in its piece called, “A Pro-Liberty Case for Gun Restrictions.”

To be honest, the piece is worth a read — not that we agree with it. In short, the argument goes that because guns are so widely available, and because things like mass shootings “create a pervasive sense of insecurity and anxiety that politicians and policymakers will inevitably seek to address,” Americans’ freedoms are limited by things like increased physical searches, more surveillance, more armed police at social events, and … more police shootings.

Look at it this way: it’s like the kids at Parkland who complained they’d have to carry transparent backpacks when they returned to school after the mass shooting there. They had to trade privacy for an increased sense of security — and they didn’t like it and likely didn’t feel any more secure.

So, are we buying the argument? Not really. Because someone else’s “pervasive sense of insecurity and anxiety” about guns shouldn’t infringe on someone’s Second Amendment right to own one. And to many who own guns legally, their firearms contribute to their sense of security. More gun control equals more freedom? Um, no.