Let’s Talk About Guns for a Moment
I’ve read our Bill of Rights and I know what it says. There’s this line that’s causing a whole lot of hullaballoo for a mere 27 words. Supposedly, it says that American citizens have the right to own and use guns. The exact wording is “the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed” but hey, I’m told ‘arms’ means guns, and not my biceps.
What baffles me is that our highly educated democratically elected officials, who are supposed to be pretty darn bright, are having trouble contextualizing those 27 words in today’s reality.
Back in 1791 when the second amendment was ratified the behemoth of a military that we have know was unimaginable. There was no effective justice system in much of the United States, and very little way for a person to protect herself without taking it into her own hands. So having a gun was pretty normal. You could shoot dinner and defend your home. Makes sense.
Problem is, it’s no longer 1791. We are lucky enough to have a pretty good military and justice system. The police and fire department response time to my apartment is less than a minute. That’s pretty awesome. So why are we still acting as if the reasons for us to have guns in the 18th century still hold true?
Hunting? I get it. Go shoot a deer. Target practice? Ok, but there’s no need for semi-automatics on the range. Self-defense? I really don’t see the purpose.
The most obvious reason to need a gun for self-defense would be to defend you from another person with a gun. Without guns you might still get in a fight, get a little bit bloody, and end up in the hospital. But guess what wouldn’t happen?
- Your kid wouldn’t go on a mass rampage at school.
- Your nephew wouldn’t shoot himself by mistake.
- You would have to think before attacking someone who you think might be a threat.
And yet, the USA has the highest rate of gun ownership in the world with 88 of every 100 people owning a firearm. Gun violence is an epidemic. There have been 62 mass shootings in the USA from 1982 to 2012. As Obama has said, the USA does not have a monopoly on crazy; we do not have a monopoly on stupid either. So other than the presence of guns, there doesn’t seem to be any reason for these events to be so common in the USA.
After each shooting there comes an outcry. It’s a pattern: shooting, press field day focused almost solely on the shooter, public outrage, politicians make promises, nothing happens. This repeats, over and over, month after month. School shootings have become so common that a company has released a bullet-proof naptime ‘blanket’ kids can use to cover themselves.
At this pace, it’s only a matter of time until the most gun-friendly NRA members and hardcore conservative politicians are affected by the shooting epidemic. I hate to think that it might take them losing a relative, friend, or neighbor to step-up and realize that our archaic laws need to be overhauled.
Reblogged this on Mindful Musings at Midlife and commented:
Yes, EXACTLY.
Hey there,
The problem with outlawing guns far as I can see from my thesis work is, the guns used in criminal activities are most commonly not “lawful” (as in bought in a store) guns. I don’t know whether the statistical rates for the cases you mentioned are higher than the examples I’ve read but the problem doesn’t solve itself just by outlawing them. I think we need to end gun production for the civilians as a whole to make its effect negligible (then again “negligible” is a sad word there, a death even among millions is not negligible in my opinion but…)
Also I find some of the guns hilariously overpowered for a hunting, if there were dragons attacking us in the wild (a-la Skyrim) they might be justified I think 🙂
Kindest regards
Arguments given are :-
1. it allows people to defend themselves.
2. it is constitutional obligation.
3. It is impossible to curb arms and impose ban.
Counter :-
1. it is assumed that people can defend themselves with a gun. most of common people are not great shooters i.e., they cannot counter attack.
Also, in our normal lives no one carries a gun most of the times. (imagone carrying gun to dentist 🙂 )
The old folks, kids cannot carry a gun
2. If the constitution says that one can bear arms, it does not necessarily means firearms or especially guns. If it means any arms then one can have machine guns too. But since there are limits set on the definition of arms to semi automatic guns, this limit can further be lowered by proper legislation.
3. this is the funniest reason i have ever heard. US can read e-mails of every netizen but cannot control guns. Ha ha ha …
On a serious note , drugs and arms are nobody’s freind they only take away their freinds and loved ones… plz do something.
Reblogged this on Zealmark's Blog and commented:
Just read….
More people in the United States successfully defend themselves with firearms than there are firearm related deaths and injuries. And those are the just the reported incidents.
Try harder.
‘I feel safe ergo everyone should be disarmed’ what selfish pampered white girl nonsense.
I could go on a speel about how guns are grossly misrepresented about how you completely and childishly misread and misunderstood the Second Amendment.
A wasted effort is all it would be. It all just makes me depressed that there’s so many people like you in the world, relegating responsibility onto others and wanting everyone to do the same, because of your own fear of taking control of your own actions. The soul crushing selfishness of wanting everyone to rendered powerless becasue you feel safe.
It’s just bloody ugly.
“Ok, but there’s no need for semi-automatics on the range.”
Does that mean you’re advocating for automatics at the range, vice semi-automatics? Because this leads me to believe that you either don’t know what you’re talking about (“Oh! “Semi-automatic, that’s a good buzz word!”; did you not have a chance to throw “high capacity magazine round clip” in there as well?) or that your argument is so obtusely backwards that you still don’t know what you’re talking about?
Let us just round this out and make clear that you, in fact, lack the depth and breadth of knowledge required to discuss this topic like an informed adult, vice a talking point girl-parrot. Words do matter in a real discussion, especially when it translates into a suggested change to our government’s foundational document.