We really should be able to agree that good people do good things with guns and bad people do bad things with guns. Then of course we have to define good people vs. bad people. To liberals all people with guns are bad, which is where the conversation breaks down and why they want to ban so-called, “Assault Rifles.” They can’t very well insist, as much as they would like to, that everyone who would (or even would like to) own one of these excellent firearms is dangerous and as such should be locked up or committed.
If we could just admit to each other that these are tools it would save us all a lot of time.
If we could just admit that there is such a thing as good people with good intentions that own firearms, it would save us even more time.
Maybe then we could have a real conversation about gun violence.
I am weary of people saying in shock, “Why does anybody NEED one of these assault rifles?!?!”
I don’t NEED a Triple Baconator either, but it’s my right to choose whether or not I want to consume one. I do want one by the way, but I CHOOSE not too because I know I will very likely gain weight.
As Neo so aptly put it, “The problem is choice.”
This is true for cheeseburgers and violence, whether it comes in the form of guns, knives, piano wire, or a sledgehammer.
Problems with gun violence in this country are not new. But we should stop giving people who are inclined (for whatever reason) do to violence with a firearm, a free reign in the form of a “Gun Free Zone” sign which effectively translates to: “No one in this place will be able to defend it should you decide you would like to murder a large number of people here.”
Taking away AR-15 style rifles or high capacity magazines from good people isn’t going to curb gun violence coming from bad/troubled/insane people one bit.
Because bad people do bad things. As Morpheus said, “Welcome… to the real world.”
If they are really so eager to solve this issue, why aren’t gun control advocates willing to start a conversation there?
Read: Like a Splinter in Your Mind.