FunCouple5280
Posts: 559
Joined: 10/30/2012
Status: offline
|
Sitting here in CO and watching this debated over gun control unfold, I can't help but comment. First off, I am a gun owner. While I object on principle to most gun control legislation, I have, for the most part, just ignored the most recent round of it. I guess I just haven't cared that much. But now, I have gotten to thinking. I just ask myself what the hell are they really trying to accomplish?
Colorado and others have are now hell bent on placing restrictions on magazine capacity as well toying with notion placing tougher restrictions on the types of guns sold (semi-automatic etc). This seems all well and good considering some of the recent mass shootings involved high-capacity magazines. But really what would this accomplish? As the Denver DA put it, the current block of gun control legislation is 'window dressing' Link. Limiting magazine capacity may slightly curb a death toll, but really will do nothing to impact the heart of the problem: people who shouldn't have guns getting them.
Being a gun owner I have no qualm with laws that are meant to inhibit people from getting guns that would be used for criminal purposes, despite how some people at the NRA feel about privacy etc. Like the Denver DA, I certainly agree that we need much harsher penalties associated with domestic violence suspects and felon caught with guns. And, I think it is time we put some kind of mental health component in the background checks system for heaven's sake. Finally, we need background checks even on private sales. I know a lot of gun nuts have an issue with this, but there is no logical reason why. It is a backdoor way to let felons and nut jobs get weapons. Anyone who really loves guns shouldn't want the kind of access to guns we have now. I am not talking to type or variety, simply the ease in which one can acquire one.
So, why the current batch of legislation? I think it is pure spite. It has nothing to do with safety or anything else for that matter. It is purely designed to piss of the non-democratic gun control crowd and do nothing more. While it is working splendidly at doing so, it has an unintended consequence. The mass consumption of guns and high cap mags. You can't buy them right now, they are sold out everywhere (I ordered 10 high cap mags and am on a 5 week backorder). More of these things are pouring into the streets than ever before. Y? They are creating a panic. This is just silly (On the other hand this is making me rich, my arsenal that picked up for about 11k in 2004-2006 is now worth about 35k!!! WHOOPPEEE).
However, I know this matters very little to many. Those who would argue we need to ban guns anyways. Well, to that I am going to offer a very controversial idea. This idea is the glass half full idea that thank god the theater shooter and sandy hook shooter only had guns! Yes, thank god that's all they had. Now, let me explain. While it is pretty much undisputed that both these people were psychos, there is a great deal of dispute as to how such tragedies could have been prevented. I say gun control had nothing to do with it. In fact, the fact they used guns may have very well limited the death toll.
First the theater: Let's assume he was unable to get a gun and was going to go on a rampage regardless (which is safe to assume considering the months of preparation he undertook). Had he simply chained an exit or two in that theater and set off a hand full of Molotov cocktails, 100+theater patrons could have very easily burned to death. Even a homemade chemical weapon could have had a very similar effect. Second the School: Let's say he still has a gun, but this time no high cap mags. Let's assume he has nothing but a 6-shooter with only 4 rounds. All he would have to do is fire off 2-3 rounds and the school would go into lock-down in the post columbine era. Basically, he gets all the teachers to incarcerate the entire student body for him. The he pulls out the homemade fire bombs, or gas, or whatever....Those children would have been trapped in a giant kill machine.
In both cases, thank the stars that American laziness took over, and all the reached for was a gun.
Now, I know this may have some reeling, but really, how do you prevent such events? Maybe we take a page out of the war on drugs. For decades the US has pissed away billions of dollars the seizure, confiscation, and outlaw or drug and can't really say they have done much to curb it use and abuse in the US. Yet, when anyone spends that money on programs that treat the addicts, it proves far more effective than going after the dealers. With incidents like the Aurora theater shooting and the Sandy Hook Massacre, money and effort would be better spent on our mentally ill. One difference between the US and other countries, isn't necessarily our murder rate, it is how little we do for our mentally ill compared to others.
I think it is time we do something about these tragedies, and I think the only way we can truly prevent them is with sensible legislation. It requires the right giving up on the idea of total privacy in gun transactions, and the left giving up on the notion of statist gun control. Let's face it you can still piss off the right by using it as an excuse to push government mental health care  .
|
gun control and tragedies - 
Profile
Then again... par for the course.
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread