Apparently, only people like Mike Bloomberg, a billionaire
who doesn’t need anyone’s money and isn’t afraid to take on other blowhards
like the NRA and Donald Trump, are able to say anything of substance about gun
control. President Obama, after
Congresswoman Gabby Giffords and several others were shot in January of 2011 in
Tucson, promised he’d champion stricter gun control laws. He didn’t.
He can’t afford to have the NRA throw its incredible power against him
in his run for re-election.
Mitt Romney didn’t have the courage to say anything of
substance after the movie-house slaughter in Colorado a few days ago. And Wisconsin’s developmentally disabled
Senator, RoJo the Clown, was allowed by the Republican Party to come out of
hiding long enough to give an interview with Fox News after the Colorado
massacre, and embarrassed us ‘sconnies again by saying that owning a
hundred-round clip was a Constitutional right.
(OK, he didn’t actually say that.
He said limits on the sale of things like hundred-round clips would be
an infringement on our freedom.)
For the record: I am
trained in the use of firearms by a highly-decorated combat veteran (my late
father); have hunted with both rifle and shotgun; don’t have a problem with
people who own handguns or hunting weapons; and I don’t think “Obama is going
to take my guns away” if this nation should ever have the courage to make some
stricter rules about what citizens can possess in terms of firearms and
associated equipment. Like hundred-round
clips.
Mobthink and hysteria take over with far too many people
every time the topic comes up. The “from
my cold, dead hands” crowd has been led to believe that any reasonable move
toward controlling automatic weapons or hundred-round clips is the beginning of
the end of the second amendment and will certainly lead to government goons
coming to their house and taking away all their guns.
Even the members of the NRA don’t believe in the stuff the
NRA leadership espouses. Nearly
three-quarters of NRA members believe the gun show loophole should be
closed. 82% of NRA members think people
on the U.S. terror watch list should not be allowed to buy guns. 78% of NRA members think it should be mandatory
to notify police if one of your guns is lost or has been stolen. Yet NRA leadership fights these common-sense
control elements whenever they’re discussed or suggested.
Many people of my acquaintance who otherwise demonstrate the
ability to engage in cogent thought seem to lose that ability when someone says
it might not be a good idea to have laws so lax that some insane person (or a
certified genius, or anyone) can buy an assault weapon and a hundred-round clip
and six thousand rounds of ammo. They
drag out that hackneyed bit of illogic that goes “guns don’t kill people,
people kill people” and spout it as though it were some sort of brilliant
thinking on a par with the Pythagorean Theorem.
And if challenged, they do the line-extension of the illogic by saying
inane things like “cars kill people but we don’t ban cars”.
I believe the crux of the matter is their refusal to understand
that reasonable restraints on the purchase of things like fully automatic
weapons and high-capacity clips has nothing to do with their ownership of a
Remington Wingmaster 870, their .30-06 Springfield, their Glock 19, their
grandad’s M-1, their favorite varmint-eliminator, their target pistol, their
skeet shooter, or any one of the thousands of other kinds of firearms commonly
owned by everyone from sportsmen and hunters to urban women who feel more
secure with a small handgun in their purse.
They continue to parrot trash-phrases like “if you outlaw
guns only outlaws will have guns” and “tell me more about how criminals follow
the law” – acting as if “banning guns” is an Obama plot just bubbling under the
surface of his cool, disconnected, European-Socialist, intellectual
elitism. The NRA wants the sheeple to
think that such a plot to “ban guns” is the hidden agenda of anyone who
supports reasonable control.
As a nation, we don’t have the courage or capacity to talk
about serious public policy at any level.
We’d rather talk about such crap as “defense of marriage” or “the war on
Christmas” or what celebrity is cheating on what other celebrity.
Let’s change the topic from “gun control” to “fully-automatic
weapon and high capacity clip control” and see what happens.
While we're at it, let's link gun ownership to membership in "a well-regulated militia." Nothing unconstitutional about that.
ReplyDeleteThat approach seems to work for Switzerland, though the Swiss probably cannot claim anything approaching the number of posturing gun-loony alpha-male wannabes per capita that we can.
controlling automatic weapons
ReplyDeleteThat from a highly-trained shooter?
Tim....puuhhhhleeeeeze.
Addendum: What in Hell makes you think that full-auto weapon purchases are NOT 'controlled'? You DO know that each one requires a special Treasury permit, right?
ReplyDelete(Not to mention the cost. A full-auto AR is about $10,000.)
Oh, by the way....ever try to find a gun-range which allows full-auto shooting in Wisconsin?