Bryan W. Alaspa 1Lock down the guns
March 3rd 2010 14:22
To me, the argument makes sense, but apparently some people do not see it the same way. If you want people to experience less gun violence, then you need to make it so fewer and fewer people are able to get guns. Yes, yes, yes, I know that criminals are always going to be able to get guns no matter what the laws are, but that is what makes them criminals. However, this idea of arming every living person and giving them permission to carry their weapons with them is just crazy. This is 18th century thinking in a 21st century world.
Many people who defend the Second Amendment of the Constitution do not know what it really says. If you ask the average Joe on the street they simply say, “It says that everyone has the right to bear arms.” No, actually it doesn’t. It says that in order for there to be a “well regulated militia” the citizens are allowed to have weapons and that the government cannot do anything to infringe upon that.
You see, back when the Constitution was written, the British had been running around taking away the guns of the settlers. Why? Well, they weren’t stupid. They knew that the people were getting ticked off and that eventually the citizens might come to life as a militia and attack them. The United States, when it was first formed, did not have a formal army. Or, to be slightly more correct, what formal army they did have was certainly not enough to defend the country if anyone attacked. So, it was assumed that, should the country be attacked, the citizens would have to martial against the attackers. Thus, having a citizenry that had easy access to rifles made sense. Plus, these were guns that took fourteen years to reload and huge portions of the population still had to shoot their own food.
In short, times have changed. This is not the world we live in anymore. Over time, groups like the NRA have corrupted and twisted the meaning. They actually feel that people should be allowed to have fully automatic rifles at their beck and call. They feel that people should be allowed to carry guns with them. They say that those mass-shooter types could have been stopped if students and regular people had been able to carry guns with them. Again, this is likely not the case.
Back in the Wild Wild West days lots of people had guns. What this lead to was lots of people pulling guns for the slightest of reasons and shooting at each other. Yes, lots of people were killed, but the evidence shows that, most people, when they get into a live firing situation are horrific shots. There are documented cases of “cowboys” getting into shooting matches across the width of a card table and being unable to hit each other.
This is because our bodies release chemicals when we get into life-threatening situations. Some people actually get addicted to them and they keep doing crazy things like hurl themselves out of airplanes. This rush of chemicals is meant to keep us alive by allowing us to flee. It also tends to cause a person to get jittery. Your breathing moves faster and it is almost impossible to aim a gun. Only those who go through training like the police and the armed forces can manage to calm themselves and become the calm-nerved shooters needed in those situations.
So, I think, if you put more guns out there on the streets you get more people killed. However, they are not the bad guys. You end up with more shooting, more crossfires and more dead people who get caught in the middle of it all.
Lock up the guns. Lock them up and lock them down. Let the trained professionals use them.
Many people who defend the Second Amendment of the Constitution do not know what it really says. If you ask the average Joe on the street they simply say, “It says that everyone has the right to bear arms.” No, actually it doesn’t. It says that in order for there to be a “well regulated militia” the citizens are allowed to have weapons and that the government cannot do anything to infringe upon that.
You see, back when the Constitution was written, the British had been running around taking away the guns of the settlers. Why? Well, they weren’t stupid. They knew that the people were getting ticked off and that eventually the citizens might come to life as a militia and attack them. The United States, when it was first formed, did not have a formal army. Or, to be slightly more correct, what formal army they did have was certainly not enough to defend the country if anyone attacked. So, it was assumed that, should the country be attacked, the citizens would have to martial against the attackers. Thus, having a citizenry that had easy access to rifles made sense. Plus, these were guns that took fourteen years to reload and huge portions of the population still had to shoot their own food.
Back in the Wild Wild West days lots of people had guns. What this lead to was lots of people pulling guns for the slightest of reasons and shooting at each other. Yes, lots of people were killed, but the evidence shows that, most people, when they get into a live firing situation are horrific shots. There are documented cases of “cowboys” getting into shooting matches across the width of a card table and being unable to hit each other.
This is because our bodies release chemicals when we get into life-threatening situations. Some people actually get addicted to them and they keep doing crazy things like hurl themselves out of airplanes. This rush of chemicals is meant to keep us alive by allowing us to flee. It also tends to cause a person to get jittery. Your breathing moves faster and it is almost impossible to aim a gun. Only those who go through training like the police and the armed forces can manage to calm themselves and become the calm-nerved shooters needed in those situations.
So, I think, if you put more guns out there on the streets you get more people killed. However, they are not the bad guys. You end up with more shooting, more crossfires and more dead people who get caught in the middle of it all.
Lock up the guns. Lock them up and lock them down. Let the trained professionals use them.
| 36 |
| Vote |
subscribe to this blog
Comment by Anonymous
Comment by Anonymous
An alternative viewpoint on some of the points you bring up:
A Human Right: Fight or Flight
A Human Right: Dependency on Others
A Human Right: Home Defense
A Human Right: Concealed Carry
Comment by Anonymous
Officer.com: Reasonable Gun Control
Note the comments of officers across the country following the article. For that matter, feel free to browse the forums on the rest of the site. There is an entire category in the civil rights section about gun control and debates of same. For instance, one thread:
Officer.com Forums: A Case Study
I apologize that all these posts show up as "anonymous." Orble wants me to register to post under a name, and I don't really want to do that.
-Erich
Comment by Anonymous
Suffice it to say, the predominant opinion you'll find on such forums from actual professional law enforcement is very supportive of the individual right to self defense and firearms ownership.
It is not my intention to bludgeon you with opposition, but as a scholar and practitioner of criminology and criminal justice interested in both the academic study and professional application in these fields, I felt compelled to comment.
Thanks,
Erich
Comment by Stormin Norman
From my Native American Point of View, I do not want ANYTHING in the way of my being able to own the same weaponry as the controlling government.