Monday, April 23, 2007

Gun Lobby Wins, Says Gun Lobby

What a dumb article:
The powerful US gun lobby, far from being weakened by last week's tragic college campus shooting, actually has emerged stronger, gun advocates said…

Wow. So the pro-gun lobby says that the pro-gun lobby is stronger now that people got shot by guns. And this is news because…

And how many people who weren’t pro-gun were consulted for this article…zero. Not one. It only quoted pro-gun people who insisted that this was good for them. Hell, it didn’t even contain an ounce of public opinion. The pro-gun lobby says that this helped them, and by god, that’s good enough for this reporter. They say this will help them pass legislation, and nobody claimed differently.

What a crock of shit. I don’t know about you, but I’ve been on a few college campuses, and I really don’t like the idea that any one of those people might be packing heat. Especially knowing that it’s likely to be the crazier ones packing heat. In fact, some crazy dude could totally be ready to start shooting up his class, and you wouldn’t be able to stop him until after he opened fire. Call me crazy, but I really don’t like that idea.

And this goes hand-in-hand with what I said in the last post. The first thing that each one of these pro-gun people thought when they heard the news was “Oh shit, people are going to want to tighten gun control.” So what do they do? They immediately go on the offensive with a PR campaign insisting that this means we need to loosen gun control. Not because it makes a lick of sense, but as a means to defend against the obvious. If it was harder for people to get guns, people would be less likely to need them. If there was control over how much ammo someone could buy, this couldn’t have happened.

And no, getting more guns on campus isn’t going to help. Sure, you’ll be able to stop massacres from getting too big. But you’re likely to have a lot more massacres. People don’t use guns if they don’t have guns. And if they have a gun, they’re more likely to do something stupid with it.

I’m not at all an anti-gun person and don’t have a problem with hunting and whatnot. But let’s not get stupid. This kind of thing obviously doesn’t happen often, and I think we should keep it that way. And that means allowing fewer guns in schools, not more. Sure, if you outlaw guns, then only the outlaws have guns. But that doesn’t mean we should make it easier for the outlaws to get them.

2 comments:

whig said...

Regulate the militia. The right to keep and bear arms is contingent upon the necessity of a well regulated militia. Require those who keep and bear arms to follow regulation.

All militia can be required to complete a course of basic training and demonstrate proficiency and understanding of the regulations.

Lill said...

Aha! A lightbulb moment for me. I will now try to explain this "regulate the militia" idea to my Liberal, Anti-Bush, NRA supporting husband. (Hey, I married him for best two out of three.) Great blog or collection of essays if you prefer.
Lill