The gun control debate is shaping up to be a deciding factor in the 2016 US Presidential election with 42% of people surveyed claiming it will influence how they vote. It is also very stupid. The idea of gun control is stupid and voting for someone based on their position on gun control is stupid.
The gun control advocates claim that gun crime will go down if we just have more restrictions on gun ownership. What? Gun CRIME will go down if it is harder to legally own a gun? What are you stupid? Crime is defined as illegal activity, so how is making it illegal to own a gun going to prevent that? Oh, you mean if criminals can not get guns without breaking the law then the will not use them to break the law? Maybe you are on drugs! If someone is going to break the law why would they follow another law when breaking it too would make their commission of whatever crime, possibly, easier? No, gun free zones do not work, either! Guns don’t magically disappear from someone’s possession when they walk into a gun free zone. It does ensure that there will be no law abiding gun owners in the area to fight off any attacks though.
You advocates of gun rights don’t get smug. Your gun rights aren’t about protecting yourself and your family from crime. How is owning a gun, that you keep locked in a safe, defensive? It’s not about putting food on the table either. We have grocery stores for that. Sport? You’re getting closer, but what about assault weapons? Why do you need, so called, assault rifles to hunt? Can’t you accomplish the same task with a hunting rifle? Hell, my dad usually does it with a bow and arrow. Yes, I know, the Second Amendment protects your gun rights. But, do you know why? I do.
The purpose of the Second Amendment is not to allow you to own guns for hunting or to protect yourself and your families from crime. Yes, the gun control crowd is right when the say it is to enable the formation of militias. It is not obviated, however, by the fact that we have a standing army and no longer need militias to protect us from foreign enemies. They have that bit wrong. The second amendment guarantees gun rights in order to form militias for the citizens to protect themselves from the government. You know, the guys with a standing army armed with assault weapons.
The debate is also rather pointless given the ruling of the Supreme Court of the United States on June 23rd, 2015. You might know it as the legalization of Gay Marriage. What it actually was, though, was far more broad ranging than that. The ruling says that if a majority of the states give a right to their citizens the remaining states cannot withhold that right from theirs. At the time of that ruling, a majority of the states (the same number as had legalized gay marriage, in fact) had granted their citizens the right to conceal carry firearms. This means that the remaining states cannot deny the right to conceal carry. Oops!!
The bottom line is this. Guns, like money (and bricks) as Dave Ramsey points out, are amoral. They are not immoral; they have no morals. They are inanimate objects. A gun will not shoot someone or something of it’s own accord. It is unable to do anything but sit there. It is the person using it who is immoral. It is that user who makes the gun good or bad, not the gun. Owning guns does not make someone a threat to others anymore than not owning them makes them harmless to their neighbors. The whole gun control debate is a way of dividing people so that the career politicians in Washington DC can stay in power. It is a political ploy. If they can keep us distracted and squabbling then they win and we lose. The funny thing is that you fell for it. You people on both sides of the debate are letting the politicians distract you from what you should be doing. You should be banding together as a people and voting for real change by getting those in Congress, that have been there for decades, out of office.