If saying “No” worked, there would be no rapes. Instead women are encouraged to take self-defense classes. Imagine that? Defending oneself against attack versus being a sitting duck because well intentioned legislation does not stop lunatics from acting.
I am not a gun owner. I also do not understand the attraction of owing so many multiple weapons that I need to store them in a locked room, cabinet, or bunker. I do, however, like the power I feel knowing I can protect myself from attack if I had a gun.
I do not intend to buy a gun. I feel safe behind the baseball bat I keep under the bed in case an intruder decides to enter my home without an invitation. Of course, a baseball bat will be as useful against a gun as asking a speeding train to stop before it hits you.
Taking guns away from law abiding citizens is not the answer. Taking guns away from criminals is probably a better idea. Can you have one without the other? Anything can be done if everyone works towards a common goal.
Hillary Clinton’s crass grab for liberal votes by saying she would use an executive order to change how guns are purchased is silly. It will prompt the other side to dig in and defend the right to own a gun versus the common goal to prevent unlawful use of guns.
Equally stupid is Donald Trump’s assertion to have armed individuals in gun free zones. I do not think the idea is stupid but it will have a similar effect as Clinton’s grandstanding. The Liberals will dig in to rid the Western World of guns. Both candidates were only interested in scoring points and not making a meaningful suggestion to solve the problem.
This is what happens when politicians, or wannabe politicians, try to solve a problem. Each side is only interested in “winning” and really not focused on solving the problem. The problem is not guns. Anyone who thinks that is the issue is in a fantasy land, naïve, or has an agenda. The problem is far more complicated. Using bumper sticker slogans to address the issue is an exercise of one-upmanship and not what we need.
We have evil people in this world. Anyone who indiscriminately kills another human being is evil. Having lawmakers squabble over the right to bear arms is a waste of time. They need to focus on stopping the lunatics before they act.
We will never solve the problem because you cannot legislate behavior. People do not follow the script. That will never change. Lawmakers should stop worrying about things they cannot change and worry about things they can change. The only thing they can change is their desire to win the debate on gun control and work at creating meaningful legislation that stops the bad guys.
Both sides need to understand there is no winning and losing when arguing ideological viewpoints while people are dying. They need to save that for wars.
We routinely have our credit checked before making a major purchase. We have our background checked, drug tested, and subjected to reference checks before getting a job offer. We have to show our license before renting a power tool. You mean to tell me it’s not OK to go through the same steps when buying a gun?
I suggest, we enforce the already overbearing gun laws and eliminate loopholes. That means all firearm transactions should require a background check and we should eliminate the “gun show loophole.” In exchange, the Liberals can allow universal acceptance of every states’ carry permit like a driver’s license. That seems reasonable to me.
I bet the Conservatives reading this balked at my first suggestion while Liberals agreed but vice versa on my second suggestion. And therein lies the issue. No one is willing to work for the common good.
We do not need to eliminate the guns. We need to eliminate the people who use them for the wrong reasons.