Guns and more guns - IHT

[igor]

http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/04/26/opinion/edguns.php

This is such an invitation for a debunker... :banghead:

Guns and more guns
Published: April 26, 2007
E-Mail Article
Listen to Article
Printer-Friendly
3-Column Format
Translate
Share Article

Text Size

By now, the logic is almost automatic. A shooter takes innocent lives, and someone says that if the victims had been armed, this wouldn't have happened. The only solution to a gun in the wrong hands, it seems, is a gun in the hands of everyone.

That's the state of the debate over gun control in the United States today. The National Rifle Association and the gun lobby have silenced every legislature in this country. Instead of stricter laws, tighter controls and better background checks, the gun lobby proposes more guns. And what the gun lobby proposes, lawmakers deliver.

Seung-Hui Cho bought his guns illegally, though with the appearance of legality. He slipped through a loophole, through a disconnect between the way Virginia defines a disqualifying mental incapacity and the way the federal government does. After the fact, the loophole is self-evident, and it's tempting to believe that now political leaders will work harder to keep people who are dangers to themselves from becoming dangers to others by buying guns. But the laws are as fragile and imperfect as they are because that is how the gun lobby wants them - and it is paying good money to keep them that way.

Those gun advocates who believe that the Second Amendment confers the right to carry a gun in public are quick to point out that they are law-abiding, decent citizens trying to protect themselves and their families in a world gone mad. But, of course, the guns can't tell the difference. Arming more people would be a recipe for disaster.

True safety lies in the civility of society, in laws that protect all of our rights and in having law-enforcement officers who are trained in the use of deadly force, then authorized to apply it in rationally defined situations. It is the gun lobby's efforts to weaken the gun laws that makes a tragedy like the one at Virginia Tech possible.

 

[chris in va]

Lovely. Yet another person that feels LEO's are there to protect you.

 

[Fast Frank]

"By now, the logic is almost automatic. A shooter takes innocent lives, and someone says that if the victims had been armed, this wouldn't have happened. The only solution to a gun in the wrong hands, it seems, is a gun in the hands of everyone."

I've participated in a couple of debates on line here lately, and the anti- crowd always seems to pull this trick.

Somehow, they either confuse or deliberately alter the message "Allow the good guys to defend themselves" into "Give everybody a gun".

This is always followed by predictions of blood in the streets and gunfights as far as the eye can see.

From the text above:

"But, of course, the guns can't tell the difference. Arming more people would be a recipe for disaster."

I don't know where they get that from, and I don't think any pro- gun source anywhere supports the idea of supplying weapons to anybody that wants to carry one away.

I suspect that this somehow stems from some naive attitude that doesn't recognize that there is a very real difference between the good guys and the bad guys.

I have been trying to clear this up by pointing out that the words "Give everybody a gun" have never been uttered, and then follow that up by pointing out that there is an existing framework already in place that weeds out the bad guys and allows the good guys to have defensive weapons.

I've also pointed out that these honest and reliable citizens that not only have the legal right to defend themselves, but also have the skills and equipment to do so are the very same people that they stand next to in line at the supermarket, or sit behind at the movies.

Pointing out that there hasn't been mass bloodshed from these people so far doesn't seem to register with these folks.

It's very much like assuring a six year old that there is no boogie man in the closet...

They hear me, but they don't believe me, and opening the door and showing them the truth is not evidence enough to change their minds.

So far, the best I have been able to accomplish is to get them to stop spewing gun control rhetoric all over the web.

I believe that small victory is only because I'm more prepared and dedicated than they are, and they get tired of getting "Shot out of the saddle" over and over with the truth.

I can only hope that perseverance will eventually make a difference.

 

[ATW525]

True safety lies in the civility of society, in laws that protect all of our rights and in having law-enforcement officers who are trained in the use of deadly force, then authorized to apply it in rationally defined situations.

Obviously written by somebody who's never really had his on the line.

 

[jamz]

While it's a true fact, he doesn't seem to realize that big portion of society is, and will most likey forever be, decidedly uncivilized.

 

[Im283]

Most writers really do not care what you think of their ideas or work. What they want it feedback, it is something they can show their editor to prove they are being read and what they write stirs thought. It provides a level of job security.

The best reaction I ever found to do with these types is to ignore them.

 

[Sage of Seattle]

A shooter takes innocent lives, and someone says that if the victims had been armed, this wouldn't have happened. The only solution to a gun in the wrong hands, it seems, is a gun in the hands of everyone.

So far, I don't see a problem. Sounds reasonable to me...

That's the state of the debate over gun control in the United States today. The National Rifle Association and the gun lobby have silenced every legislature in this country. Instead of stricter laws, tighter controls and better background checks, the gun lobby proposes more guns. And what the gun lobby proposes, lawmakers deliver.

Haven't there been recent threads on THR describing newer, more draconian gun control laws enacted within the past few weeks? In Illinois and New York, if I'm not mistaken.

But the laws are as fragile and imperfect as they are because that is how the gun lobby wants them - and it is paying good money to keep them that way.

It's kind of funny in a way how THE GUN LOBBY wants all of these things and not regular gun owners interested in their freedoms.

Those gun advocates who believe that the Second Amendment confers the right to carry a gun in public are quick to point out that they are law-abiding, decent citizens trying to protect themselves and their families in a world gone mad. But, of course, the guns can't tell the difference.

Now I KNOW this author is smoking crack, because I can prove beyond a shadow of doubt that MY guns CAN tell the difference. They whisper it to me every day...

Now my car, on the other hand.... that thing will run over any old body that stands in front of it.

True safety lies in the civility of society, in laws that protect all of our rights and in having law-enforcement officers who are trained in the use of deadly force, then authorized to apply it in rationally defined situations.

I have also trained in the use of deadly force and I can apply it in very rationally defined situations. Someone tries to hurt me or my family and I'm afraid for my life or theirs, then I shoot the SOB. Very rational.