About guns laws: Larry makes my case, but does it better

In a comment thread at Woodgate’s View, proprietor Larry presents a thorough and thoughtful case for gun control laws. I’m so admiring of how well constructed is his argument . . . well, here it is. It’s a keeper:

 [he replies to a commenter] thanks for leaving your comments and no, I don’t think you’re an uneducated moron. I don’t know you well enough to characterize you as such.  My comments are generic in nature but with a purpose.

I am familiar with firearms.  Did some bird hunting before I entered the Marine Corps where I learned even more about weapons, including my M-14 I that I earned a Marksman rating with.  But I had the disadvantage of using my weapon in a way that many people who are passionate about guns never have or most likely never will.  I shot at other people with it and was shot at while serving in Vietnam.  I don’t know that I actually ever hit anyone or worse, killed someone while shooting at them since my actual combat experience was more limited than a grunt who’s routinely out in the bush.  But I was stationed on an isolated hill for nearly a year near the DMZ and would occasionally encounter enemy fire

I have seen the damage that firearms do and because of that I have never owned a gun of my own after being discharged from the service.   I honestly think they do more harm than good and I find no sport in killing animals with them.  The need to kill our own food disappeared years ago.  The “thrill of the kill” is, to me, not a humane response.  There’s something extremely barbaric about it and I’d like to think we’ve advanced over the years where ancient survival instincts need not be acted out at the expense animals losing their lives to fulfill this unnecessary leftover from another time period.

I understand that we live in a world where bad people can hurt us and some are so overwrought with this fear that they feel compelled to seek protection with a handgun.  But the point of my post is that this fear has exceeded rational limits and there is an entire culture now that uses this reasonable exception for owning a weapon where they feel the need to own large arsenals of automatic weapons and their accouterments, like silencers, to go with them.  They have become dangerous toys for otherwise normal people.

Firing your weapon in an enclosed firing range is a good reason to protect your hearing but if you had read the story by Anna Tinsley I supplied a link to you would understand the jist of my comments.  Not everyone who owns a gun buys a silencer for ear protection in an enclosed firing range.  Most, according to one Ft. Worth gun dealer, buy them “because they’re cool.”  It’s a part of a pervasive mentality in this state where people often think with their asses rather than their brains.

Owning a gun is a serious business but you get the idea that too many want them out of some exaggerated fear for their life or to simply be part of an in-crowd.  A strong indication that critical thinking is seriously lacking with them.

You may be one of the few people that takes a common sense approach to owning a firearm but if you’re spending so much time firing off rounds where you need a silencer to prevent using the “medical system later in life” maybe you need a more healthy hobby.

Yes, I know you have to jump through hoops to own a silencer.  Again, had you read the article by Tinsley I supplied you with you would see this fact was pointed out.  And though I could have gone in the direction that said silencers making it easier for dangerous people to kill innocent people and do so more unnoticed, I avoided this mainly because they are, on paper at least, difficult to acquire.  You know of course that a truly dangerous person with malice in his or her heart would simply buy a silencer on the black market to circumvent any detection by the legal authorities, right?

And please, don’t do the apples to oranges comparison with owning guns and other sporting events equipment.  I’m sure there are those novices who pay for the most expensive equipment in some sports who have the least skills but in their attempt to be “cool” a set of golf clubs or a high dollar tennis racket is not going to accidentally kill someone out of fear or over enthusiasm.  They’re designed purely to entertain.  Guns are designed to kill and can do so more successfully and permanently than being whacked with a 4 iron.

If I hadn’t made my pointy perfectly clear, to be sure I’m not opposed to some forms of gun ownership.  I am however opposed to the unlimited ownership of weapons and the ability now to carry a gun damn near anywhere people congregate and expect them to remain sane and rational at all times.  When I see laws that promote these excesses, I jump all over them and hope that I can make them look foolish enough to some people who are contemplating purchasing a gun out of a heightened fear for their safety or because it a “cool” thing to do.

7 responses to “About guns laws: Larry makes my case, but does it better

  1. Clapping feverishly here…!

    Like

  2. Forget it Guy….
    Ain’t gonna change a THING….
    American’s LOVE their guns….
    Democrats have come to learn the hard way that they should STAY OUT of the THAT political fight …
    Which they LOSE every time …..

    Like

  3. American’s LOVE their guns….

    Because they are compensating for a political system that has stripped most of them of their say on how the country is run?

    Seems like a good trade for me (!). You keep your guns, the US continues to move further down the path of corporatocracy. All is well.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s