Common sense lost on "Anti's"
With the landmark ruling by the Supreme Court, the liberal mass media were quick to trot out professors, medical doctors, politicians and citizens who decried the ruling as the court effectively opening the flood-gates of murder, robbery and rampage by gun-totin’ whackos upon the streets of the nation.
Why do the Antis consistently (and, regardless of facts and figures, seemingly permanently) decry guns, and the law-abiding, gun-owning citizen, as the root of all gun-violence evil? How can they not understand the common sense arguments in favor of guns rights?
The Antis preach a gospel of strict gun-control laws. They seem to cling to the notion that, with the passage of a few more highly restrictive gun laws that ban handguns, they will solve the problem of gun violence in our society today.
This mind-set makes no sense at all to me. The vast majority of the people committing the crimes of gun violence (murder, robbery, etc.) are, as a rule, criminals – gang bangers, thugs, thieves, murderers, etc. By definition, criminals DO NOT obey the law. Let me repeat that point – criminals DO NOT obey the law. How, then, will enacting more laws have any effect on the criminals committing the crimes? The criminals already ignore the existing gun-control laws. What will be the effect of passing even more restrictive gun-control laws? The criminals will simply ignore them.
There are very strict laws in this country regarding speeding on the roadways. Has this eliminated speeding? There are strict laws against driving while intoxicated. Have these laws eliminated drunk driving? There are already very harsh consequences associated with being convicted of killing someone, up to and including the death penalty. Has this seriously reduced the numbers of murders committed? Will more gun-control laws eliminate gun violence in our society?
This argument, unfortunately, falls on deaf ears. Antis don’t, or can’t, make the logical connection between the policy of endlessly promulgating strict gun laws, and the actual (non) impact that such laws have on the amount of gun violence. What happened after the draconian gun-control laws in Washington DC went into effect? Did the murder rate decrease? In all but one year, the rate of homicides in DC increased. The amount of gun violence increased. In effect, the laws in DC just made the average citizen living there a helpless victim to any thug with a gun.
To an Anti, a gun is inherently evil and dangerous, even when the gun is just lying on a table with no one in proximity. They blame the gun for being the cause of so many murders and robberies, instead of blaming the criminal intent of the perpetrator. They miss the point – if criminals have no guns, they simply arm themselves with some other device (knife, sword, club, tire-iron, etc.) to attack their intended victims. It’s not having a gun in hand that turns someone into a killer – it’s that person deciding to kill someone, and become a killer, that turns someone into a killer.
To Antis, guns only have one purpose – to kill. I beg to disagree; there are legitimate uses for guns that do not involve killing – I use my gun to shoot targets. I enjoy shooting targets at the range, just as some people enjoy hiking, or sailing. I have put several thousand rounds down-range in my lifetime, and I have never, ever, killed any one. I may have used up a couple of trees worth of paper for the targets, but I have never caused any human being (or animal, for that matter) to die.
My gun is also used for self-defense. Luckily, I have never had to use my pistol to defend myself, but I do keep it ready for that use. I am no longer “21 and bullet-proof”; I happen to be old, and slower than I used to be, and missing 1/3 of one of my legs. I would be at a tremendous disadvantage if I were to be accosted by a criminal or several criminals (they do seem to like to hunt in packs, don’t they?) – “easy pickings” is a phrase that comes to mind. I am no longer physically able to flee, so standing my ground is my likely choice. And for that reason, my gun is an essential survival tool – a great equalizer. I do not go out and seek danger, but if I am attacked, I can increase my chances of survival through being armed and ready.
Antis always seem to believe that everyone should depend on the local police department for protection from criminal attack. That belief has a major fallacy – the police are not legally required to protect anyone. In addition to that fact, there are only so many police officers working at any one time. The chances that there is a police officer nearby when any one is attacked are very, very slim.
All in all, it seems that, when one enters into the Brady-Bunch ranks, one must check one's commons sense at the door, where it is lost forever....:frown: .