Tag: conspiracy theories

I am soooo tired of the shrilling over the guns in this country. Seriously, even some of my own friends have fallen off the deep end w/some of their comments about gun rights. And the cognitive dissonance to trump up reasons to avoid enacting stronger controls is just dazzling to behold. As a preface, I grew up on a farm with plenty of guns. We had a variety of rifles, shotguns, and occasionally even a few handguns. I also work for a law-enforcement agency. I am as pro-gun as can be. That being said, I am also pro-responsibility.

You do not need a high-powered weapon that pumps out bullets in microseconds. You cannot come up with a single valid reason, other than selfishness ^[1]or naked male insecurity to validate a need for such things. There may have been a time when we as a society could live w/o such restrictions but that time is long past. And for that matter, the 2nd amendment does not give you unrestricted rights to any type of firearm. It refers to a well regulated militia, keyword regulated. The government can and has regulated the types of weapons that are legal/carry in this country for decades.

POTUS is not “after your guns.” This is probably the most ridiculous thing I’ve heard so far. The conspiracy theories I’ve heard are beyond crazy. For the record, this POTUS has done less than any recent sitting prez in memory regarding gun regulations. The fact that he has been pushed into coming up with some sensible gun regulations after repeated tragedies does not make him ‘after your guns.‘ Many of the proposals put forward were already in a previous assault-weapons ban that expired recently. The world kept turning and people still had guns while the ban was in place. The rest helps close loop-holes so felons, mentally-ill, etc cannot get access to weapons they shouldn’t have. Getting a background check for all weapons sales is not unrealistic in any fashion. You’d think this would be a no-brainer.

Then we hear the argument, if we take the guns away, the killers will still kill. Really? So should we also do away with laws that prevent murder? People are still getting murdered so why have a law right? Again, this argument would be more relevant if we were talking about banning all guns. We aren’t. You can listen to all the rhetoric and lies being pumped out by the NRA and the crazies, or you can look at cold hard facts. Restricting access to types of weapons in no way infers the government is after all weapons. You’ll still be able to legally buy a gun to protect yourself. You just won’t have access to weapons that pump out rounds and rounds of bullets every minute.

Lastly, the only possibly relevant reason you could argue for keeping assault weapons would be to protect yourself from a tyrannical government. Sounds simple on it’s face. But let’s look at that for a moment. When the 2nd amendment was written the government was on equal footing with its citizenship when it came to weapons. Beyond cannons, the government had pretty much the same weapons as everyone else. It took minutes to load said weapons and the range was quite limited. That couldn’t be further from the truth today. The reality is your ‘gubbmint’ has enough automated firepower to wipe out entire cities w/o a single soldier setting foot on the ground. If the government really wanted to come after its citizens, it could. We haven’t lived in an age of equal footing regarding armed rebellion pretty much since the civil war. Those days are behind us. And to think otherwise, is more than foolish. So this idea that you need assault weapons to protect you from the government is flawed logic at its finest.

If you add all the civilized countries on the entire planet together, we still out-number them in gun deaths almost 10-1. You can lie to yourself and others about your reasons, but common sense will prevail in the end. It may not prevail right away or even during this administration, but it will eventually. The question is how many more people (and children) have to die needlessly before we wake up as a country and act responsibly?