I apologize in advance for offending a few folks. I know that what I'm about to write cuts across the grain of what many of my conservative friends whom I deeply respect believe in. I have no illusion that my words will change anyone's mind about this subject, but I just have to get this off my chest. Some say that it's not right to talk about this topic when emotions are still raw from the carnage that took place that terrible night in a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado. If not now, then when?
I am about as conservative and committed a Republican as I can be. But there is one policy issue that almost all my Republican friends share that I do not. Most support and will without any hesitation what-so-ever defend vigorously the right to own and carry guns. For most of those, that even means that any gun of any kind should be with very few restrictions available to any and every law-abiding citizen. News flash! Up until the moment James Holmes pulled the trigger, he was a law-abiding citizen. Every weapon, every bullet, and every piece of protective armor he put on his body the night he shot over 70 innocent people, killing a dozen of them as of this writing, was obtained legally. The laws that are supposedly sufficient to ensure that bad guys don't get guns were all followed. They aren't working folks.
Despite the opinion I'm about to write, I recognize that the right to bear arms is in fact a right granted by the 2nd amendment to the constitution. So, my friends who disagree with me have all the "ammunition" they need (pun intended) to win the argument. But I have to wonder if the founding fathers had any imagination even in their worst nightmares, about how violent this country would become in a couple hundred years. I wonder if they really "loved" guns, or simply recognized that it was a necessity to arm themselves in order to establish the free and independent country that was so young and fragile it could easily be overrun and destroyed if its people were not able to defend themselves?
Why do I have a reservation about guns? At the root is this question: What is the most basic and fundamental purpose for which the first gun was invented? I know it's neither as simple nor black and white as this, but I contend that the reason the first gun was invented was NOT for recreational nor noble purposes.
I'm so tired of the cliché "Guns don't kill people. People kill people". Well duh! Until we can figure out a way to turn all these sick-os into saints, the only thing we can do to control their aberrant behaviors short of pre-emptively incarcerating everyone we even remotely think might commit a deadly or threatening crime with a gun is to try our best to make sure that they don't have one to begin with. I think we need to try harder.
The alternative is to make sure everyone has a gun at all times and in all places. As crazy as that sounds, people actually advocate that. I don't want to live in that place where everyone is packing a lethal weapon at all times.
I contend that there is no other weapon as devastatingly efficient, easy and deadly to use as a gun. Any gun. I don't care how big or how small. Guns do in fact, kill people. Why? Because that is what they are meant to do. That is what they were conceived to do. That is the sole purpose for which they were invented. They were invented to kill or maim. They were invented to give one person the advantage over another who had to depend on his strength or agility alone. That could be said about the evolution of every weapon from sharpened sticks to stones, to knives to whatever. But all those other things also have other purposes. Dare I say "legitimate" purposes? A gun has no legitimate purpose other than to kill or maim. You can say defensive killing or maiming is legitimate. I concede that point, but I maintain that defensive killing is still killing and that is the point I'm trying to make. Guns are made to kill.
Can they be used for hunting? Sure. Can they be used for recreational target shooting? Sure. But that is evidence of how decent human beings can take something bad and use it for good or at least benign purposes. What guns were invented for is killing and maiming. Isn't it peculiar that even recreational targets are often times silhouettes of human bodies? Connect the dots people.
Let's say that we compromise and agree that rifles have a good purpose, hunting for food. Okay. Granted. I don't think it's necessary in this day and age, nor do I personally understand the thrill that people get when they kill an animal, even if for the very good and acceptable purpose of providing food.
Let's say that handguns have a good and righteous purpose. I can't think of one that doesn't involve killing or maiming or make-believe killing or maiming or honing one's skills so that one can...kill or maim better than another. But let's say even handguns are in fact necessary things for self-defense.
What on earth or heaven could possibly be a legitimate purpose for a non-military person to have or use a military grade automatic or semi-automatic assault weapon? I'm sure the reasons will all be defensive or recreational in nature. Forgive me; I just don't get it.
